- From: Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com <mtanalin@yandex.ru>
- Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2012 02:42:44 +0400
- To: Chris Eppstein <chris@eppsteins.net>
- Cc: François REMY <fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr>, www-style@w3.org
Good option. This would disallow using variable value as property _name_ though. 18.02.2012, 02:35, "Chris Eppstein" <chris@eppsteins.net>: > What's wrong with using $? :root { $accentColor: green; } > h1 { color: $accentColor; } > Chris > > On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 9:46 AM, François REMY <fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr> wrote: >> Maybe we could replace 'data' by 'var' to avoid confusion with HTML5 data attributes. It's also shorter to write :-) >> >> :root { var-accentColor: green; } >> h1 { color: var(accentColor); } >> >> But if it's going to make adoption/standardization slower, I prefer to stay with 'data'. I can't wait to announce that CSS variables finally work in all modern browsers. >> >> François >> >> -----Message d'origine----- From: Brian Kardell >> Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 2:33 PM >> To: Daniel Glazman >> Cc: www-style@w3.org >> Subject: Re: [css-variables] the new ED for CSS Variables >> >> I agree, I've said in the past that I think this is the best idea for >> "variables" in CSS that I've seen put forward. >> >> Minor editorial type comments on the current state of the draft: >> >> I mentioned this a few months ago, but I would like to reiterate: I >> think it is definitely worth going to some measure to ensure an >> understanding of the actual relationship between data properties in >> CSS and data properties in HTML as I can easily see confusion here >> with people doing something like: >> >> <div data-foo="something"> >> >> and then expecting to be able to say: >> >> div{ >> property: data(foo); >> } >> >> Or vice versa. >> >> The table in section #2 just says "see prose) for a description, but >> the relevant bit it probably small enough to fit, "anything that is >> valid according to the value production in the CSS Core Grammar." >> Likewise, in the same table (or at least in the prose) it is probably >> worth mentioning that the data-* would have to be "anything that is >> valid according to the identifier production in the CSS Core >> Grammar". >> >> I know that this has come up in other threads recently too, but - is >> there some rationale for splitting this into two _very_ small drafts, >> one that deals with the CSS part, and the other that deals with the >> CSSOM extensions part? It seems that the later is less done and given >> the state of CSSOM it could hold things up needlessly. I agree though >> that access through CSSOM would be good - but that almost seems like a >> whole separate topic and a whole different level of complexity at this >> point... >> >> -Brian >> >> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 7:12 AM, Daniel Glazman >> <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com> wrote: >>> As I said a while ago in www-style, I think the proposal for CSS >>> Variables in [1] is just brilliant. This is by far the simplest, >>> the best integrated into CSS, mechanism we could probably think of. >>> >>> Kudos to the authors. I want it in all browsers and I want it there >>> as soon as possible. And - modulo the fact I have to read and reread >>> the proposal in greater details - I want it as is. >>> >>> [1] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-variables/#cssom-cssvariable >>> >>> </Daniel>
Received on Friday, 17 February 2012 22:43:17 UTC