RE: [css-variables] Custom properties using the 'var' prefix? (Issue 1, !important)

On Sep 7, 2012 5:44 PM, "Sylvain Galineau" <sylvaing@microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> That it would only be confusing to less than a majority is a poor
argument.
>
> And though I have no interest in hypothetical gambling I know plenty of
> perfectly regular web folk who, even though they don't connect 'X-' with
> the IETF organization proper are perfectly familiar with this pattern from
> configuring their own mail server or doing some internet mail processing.
> While the origin and history may be more arcane I do not believe the
> convention is specialized knowledge at all.
>
The part that they understand actually isn't a bad comparison, that's all I
am saying.  I don't want to beat the argument to death because there are
plenty of choices.  I think x- is not bad, maybe my preference even and I
am generally very worried about unnecessary confusion.  You
disagree...that's ok :)  we can agree to disagee and that it probably
doesn't matter that much in the sense that there are lots of options.  I'm
not really willing to stand up for it beyond that :)

> Last, fwiw, while I am generally fine in principle with keeping things
short
> I do consider arguing 1-char vs. 2- or 3-character prefixes a complete
waste
> of time; if only because a massive and growing number of people seem
obviously
> happy to type -webkit- all over the bloody place without ever complaining
how
> much painfully longer than -ms or -o it really is.
>
I made the same point a loooong time ago...also have no problem with the
fact that most property names in css are very long indeed.

> Never mind that this prefix is to be used at definition time i.e. for a
given variable
> most of the typing will involve unprefixed references.
>
Different thread.  I think no, but let's keep them together :)

> I therefore propose -bikeshed-.

Purple!  :)  I agree.
>