- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 10:52:48 -0700
- To: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>
- Cc: François REMY <fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr>, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, Chris Eppstein <chris@eppsteins.net>, Divya Manian <manian@adobe.com>, www-style@w3.org
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 10:51 AM, Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com> wrote: >> This is pretty much exactly what's currently in the draft, except the >> draft uses a var- prefix. > > Yeah, I guess I should have clarified that was way too short and > missing important points. I have a tendency to go the other way and > be overly verbose which I am trying to fight... Let me try again... > > As I said before, I like the draft "as is" in all of the moving parts > and everything - I even am not personally confused by var-. However, > given the evolution and where it ended up, I see that this is causing > a lot of confusion and also that once you zero in on "it's just a > special property," people seem to get it a lot quicker. What I was > saying then was, keep the key points, but lose all "variable" > reference -- is that a non-starter? > > Like, why not just call it the "CSS Author Defined Properties" and use > that metaphor all the way down - keeping all the same parts: def-* is > a space to hang author defined properties (like data-* in HTML). Some > function allows you access to them specially (again, like dataset in > HTML, they don't have data- prefixes there either), and $ is a > shorthand to that function (again, like dataset without the data-). You're explaining too much, which is confusing me - it seems like you think the draft is further away from what you're suggesting than it is. As far as I can tell, the only thing you're suggesting is to change the "var-" prefix on the properties to "def-". Everything else you've suggested is already in the draft. Correct? ~TJ
Received on Thursday, 14 June 2012 17:53:37 UTC