Re: [selector-profiles] confusion



On 7/11/13 10:46 AM, "François REMY" <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com> wrote:

>>>Anyway, I do think that selectors that are evaluated only once will be a
>>>pain for developers. It would be very hard to debug them, or even report
>>>them in debug tools. This is not to say it's impossible, but that would
>>>be messy...
>>
>> Assuming you can even come up with a definition of 'once' that aligns
>>with
>> whatever use-cases would motivate this. I've lost track of what it is
>> we're trying to solve here.
>
>I think there are two issues here:
>
>- The first one is that the "fast" and "complete" profiles do not have
>clear names that explain what they're all about. By "fast" we actually
>mean "usable in live stylesheets" and by complete we mean usable in qSA.
>We should probably update the profiles names (aka do some bikeshedding).
>
>- The second one is that the reason we introduce selectors in the
>"complete" category is that people have actual use cases for them and
>will probably use qSA to leverage them anyway. Brian & Lea are arguing we
>should provide a mechanism to allow them to be used in stylesheets by
>relaxing the live-updatability constraint browsers impose on themselves.
>My take was to define an acceptable out-of-date timeout, Lea's one was to
>run the selctors only once the page loaded.

Dude, I got all that. I am asking for the specific use-cases that suggest
that, yes, authors might indeed end up calling qSA on load so regularly it
ought to be baked in. Having 'a' use-case or 'some' use-cases is very
different from 'yes, this sounds like something I'd want to do regularly'.

>
>
>
>My proposal copes with all traditional stylesheets needs that can
>accomodate slight FOUC {for example highlighting an element based on its
>content as the user is typing for example...}

Whoa. 'traditional stylesheets that can accommodate slight FOUC' could
well be the weirdest, most subjective, undefinable thing I've ever read on
this list. Respect…:)

* {
 stylesheet-mode: traditional;
 fouc-level: slight;
 use-case: auto;
}

>while Lea's one is intended to deal with static documents where you can
>live up with a selector that actually never update after the page load.
>
>I personally find this too restrictive, but that's my take.          

Maybe, but this one is understandable by people who aren't in your head!

Received on Thursday, 11 July 2013 17:56:11 UTC