- From: François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 23:34:22 +0100
- To: "liam@w3.org" <liam@w3.org>
- CC: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
TLDR: Why should attr(data-xyz) be called an Attribute REFERENCE while var(xyz) should be called a variable? Both are the same concept, and this is not the concept of variable but the one of a reference. This is why I keep my proposal to use the Property Reference name. > In algebra, saying, > x = y + z > x = x + 1 > is a nonsense. > > It's not about memory addresses or stacks or heaps, and it's not about > compile-time or runtime. Wait, it's still about compile-time vs runtime. It's not because your language has a Static Single Assignment that it's a different version of variables. Variables in this context are created at some point (or a considered global) and can't change of value therafter, it doesn't mean anything about the variable definition. The second thing is: the variable is the memory box, not the reference to a memory box. This is called a pointer, and, in the case you want live updating like in the CSS case, a dynamic reference or a data binding. Why should attr(data-xyz) be called an Attribute REFERENCE while var(xyz) should be called a variable? Both are the same concept, and this is not the concept of variable but the one of a reference. All this is a non-sense.
Received on Monday, 11 February 2013 22:34:57 UTC