- From: Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu <kennyluck@csail.mit.edu>
- Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 03:17:05 +0800
- To: François REMY <fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr>
- CC: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, Chris Eppstein <chris@eppsteins.net>, Divya Manian <manian@adobe.com>, www-style@w3.org
(12/06/15 2:28), François REMY wrote: > This is actually my point of view, too. I just fear this is yet another > subject of disagreement and I therefore tried to avoid the discussion. Debating about editorial matters is often quite frustrating indeed, but if writing the spec in a particular way will increase consensus than I would encourage the editor to consider listening to whoever finds the current prose confusing. On the other hand, I don't know if the WG or W3C allows this, but a way to move this forward without disturbing the editor seems to be to ask Brian and folks to fork the spec into a tutorial-like Web developer version, where the terminology can be tweaked to make sure the least people are "confused". > However, this is orthogonal to the syntax we'll choose (as long as we > keep [css-variables] defined as normal properties) : more than one > syntax would match the name 'user-defined properties' (or 'authors > properties' or whatever you name them). Indeed, this is totally orthogonal. A problem I have with this thread is that I can't tell if some feedback is normative or just informative/editorial. Cheers, Kenny
Received on Thursday, 14 June 2012 19:17:39 UTC