- From: Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com <mtanalin@yandex.ru>
- Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2012 20:32:17 +0400
- To: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@kozea.fr>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
09.01.2012, 19:53, "Simon Sapin" <simon.sapin@kozea.fr>: > Le 09/01/2012 15:26, Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com a écrit : > >>>> Bad idea or not, we do have it in css3-page: >>>> >>>> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-page/#margin-at-rules >> As far as I can see, compared with what I propose, margin-at-rules is >> a different feature for a different purpose. > > Sorry this wasn’t clear enough. The reference to css3-page is not about > the feature proposal, but about the syntax detail of mixing declarations > and at-rules. > > Other that not being done in standards before (which it was), is there a > problem with such mixing? Thanks for clarification. Nevertheless, syntax of margin-at-rules is actually similar to syntax I propose (nested @rules side-by-side with property/value declarations). On the contrary, in SASS/LESS, _selectors_ (not at-rules) are placed side-by-side with declarations. Main problem with SASS/LESS approach, in my opinion, is some nonuniformity/inconsistence (which leads to parsing complication and potential issues with backward compatibility) due to there is no _simple_ way to differentiate selectors from declarations in case of mixing selectors with declarations: we have two different type of things that starts with just arbitrary string (as opposed to at-rules that starts from '@'). >>>> As much as I like the idea, syntax details aside and assuming >>>> this is spec’d and implemented right now, it will be many years >>>> before we can use it on the web without fallbacks because of >>>> older browser versions. >> Base on such arguments, we could don't do anything new at all never, >> so such arguments are useless at all. > > Agreed in general, though I maintain that in this case the alternative > is equivalent and available today. By the way, I don't use neither SASS nor LESS (or anything similar) exactly because they are nonstandard and have no really wide support in CSS-code editors (which, in turn, is likely because they are nonstandard). >>>> On the other hand, pre-processors like LESS or SASS are available >>>> right now. They can be changed/updated/replaced without browser >>>> support concerns. >> Standard feature could be used in server-side preprocessors with the >> same result. While there is big fundamental difference between >> standard features and nonstandard ones. One of most important is that >> using standard feature reliably prevents syntax conflicts between >> nonstandard feature and standard one added later and having same >> syntax (or parts of syntax) but different meaning. > > Good point. > > -- > Simon Sapin
Received on Monday, 9 January 2012 16:35:38 UTC