- From: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2013 17:31:16 -0500
- To: "Jens O. Meiert" <jens@meiert.com>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CADC=+jdoeuw7uzyQBSxWJfULsLguD28ahS1Ehg1eW8=6=Fu6Fw@mail.gmail.com>
On Feb 17, 2013 12:28 AM, "Jens O. Meiert" <jens@meiert.com> wrote: > > It seems CSS variables remain based on var-foo/var(foo). I stick to my > argument that this is counter-intuitive. > ThIs much i semi agree with, but change the few characters on either side and i would love it. > I don’t intend to argue against the current syntax forever, but I > still like to ask, did we explore other syntactical options, like e.g. > the following? > > foo { [var]: 20 } > bar { line-height: [var]px } > > Generally, could someone—no offense, but maybe not Tab :)—explain why > we are left with what we have now? I find it hard to believe that we > have no options that are more usable, i.e. user-friendly. > > Thanks! > > Jens. > > -- > Jens O. Meiert > http://meiert.com/en/ > The best reason to keep the format in tact with CSS is that these are simply Custom Properties, no different than others in almost every respect... That is a strength for teachability. If it weren't for the fact that the meaning is overloaded i would suggest that auth-* as a prefix would make me fully happy... But honestly.. A good name with a few chars is tough. I still hold that x-* is entirely sweet :)
Received on Sunday, 17 February 2013 22:31:44 UTC