- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2012 12:59:58 -0800
- To: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Thursday 2012-10-25 11:20 +0200, Florian Rivoal wrote: > While we are at it, do you think you could pull the definition of > media_query_list from css3-mediaqueries into css3-conditional? > Essentially, all of section 3 and 3.1 could be moved to > css3-conditional. > > That way, all the syntactic aspects of media queries would be fully > normatively described in css3-conditional. This would simplify > css4-mediaqueries a lot, as it would only need to define media types > and media features, and the semantics, but it could leave the syntax > entirely to css3-conditional. Without any (indirect) dependency on > css3-mediaqueries, that spec could be completely superseded. Advantages of moving media queries syntax to Conditional Rules: * Keep the similar microsyntaxes (@supports syntax and media query syntax) together in one draft. * We'd be able to apply the improvements incorporated in @supports syntax (negation, more flexibility with conjunction and disjunction) to media query syntax sooner rather than later Disadvantages: * We might end up holding up @supports in order to apply the syntax changes to media query syntax. * There are a bunch of other things referring to media queries, and it might not be obvious they'd need to update their references; it would be a bit confusing to have a spec for media queries but have the syntax for media queries actually defined elsewhere. * having one Level 3 spec (Conditional) replace part of another Level 3 spec (Media Queries) could be a bit confusing So I think I'm leaning towards saying that it ought to stay in the media queries spec, but I could be convinced otherwise. -David -- 𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂 𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
Received on Sunday, 11 November 2012 22:58:29 UTC