- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2012 00:23:46 +0100
- To: Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com <mtanalin@yandex.ru>
- Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, www-style@w3.org
* Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com wrote: >18.01.2012, 20:48, "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>: >> On Wed, 18 Jan 2012, Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com wrote: >> >>> In case of it was not clear enough yet: my goal is not to find a >>> solution for a specific task. Instead, my goal is to improve CSS itself. >> >> Changes that aren't solutions to specific tasks aren't improvements. > >Consider increased flexibility as a task if you want. Flexibility includes the Working Group's ability to assign some meaning to @import after a certain point in a style sheet in the future without the new behavior being in conflict with existing practise in certain ways. You could read the current requirements as saying that using the @import rule at certain points as something the Working Group reserves for later use when it finds a usage that is more valuable to authors than being able to use it with the usual meaning right now. Assinging a specific meaning to it now would probably remove that option, so this may be a loss in the long term. I am not saying that is likely, but the argument is not quite so simple as you make it out to be. Note that this includes the option of changing how @import "at the top" works; it could be for instance that the Working Group decides at some point that @import at the top imports "variables" from other documents, and allowing @import in the middle of a style sheet might make that more confusing, which might be bad, as a simple example. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
Received on Friday, 20 January 2012 23:24:03 UTC