Re: [css-variables] CSS Custom Properties L1

No love? No hate?  No thoughts at all?  People have been pretty vocal on
this subject I general, so I am confused by the sudden sound of crickets at
our alternative proposal, which works the same way but has different names,
additional prose and examples to avoid the confusion.

-Brian
On Jun 18, 2012 4:34 PM, "François REMY" <fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr> wrote:

> Hi everybody,
>
> Brian and I are happy to submit to your attention the first version of our
> CSS Custom Properties proposal. In the last days, Brian and I have been
> trying to produce a concrete specification covering our common vision about
> the present and the future of the CSS Variables spec. You can discover it
> here : http://fremycompany.com/TR/**2012/ED-css-custom/<http://fremycompany.com/TR/2012/ED-css-custom/>
> .
>
> The reason why we started to write this specification was to give to the
> CSSWG an opportunity to react to the general lack of comprehension of the
> CSS Variables specification and its choices, by using a vocabulary that
> best describes what the spec really provides, instead of where it comes
> from.
>
> We also pursued two additionnal goals. Firstly, we wanted to make the spec
> more accessible to web authors, by using real-life examples and by
> conducing a research on how 'Custom CSS Properties' are currently
> understood by the web community. Secondly, we tried to make it more easy to
> implement and extend by introducing intermediate concepts where they were
> useful, for example to mutualize error handling.
>
> We certainly expect to get (positive as well as negative) feedback on this
> proposal and we already thank you for the time you'll dedicate to read it.
> Brian & François
>
> -----------------------
> PS: We encourage contributions to the specification by the mean of its
> GitHub repository: https://github.com/bkardell/**
> CSS-Custom-Properties-Module-**Draft<https://github.com/bkardell/CSS-Custom-Properties-Module-Draft>- other proposals are also welcome, as stated by Tab Atkins in a previous
> mail. We encourage authors to work in groups, to achieve better results and
> because this is actally a nice experience.
>