- From: Yehuda Katz <wycats@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 19:17:58 +0100
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAMFeDTUGXVDPJ-+sdHF0AtnxTvOxRgK=V6+Aw_dJ=EsxKSeHTA@mail.gmail.com>
Yehuda Katz
(ph) 718.877.1325
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>wrote:
> Recently there was a thread about reducing the duplication in Media
> Queries, which wanted to use Variables. I pointed out that we
> couldn't use CSS Variables as written, but I'd like to pursue lexical
> variables at some point in the future for this kind of thing.
>
> Alex Russell just suggested another approach to me in a private email
> - crack open MQs themselves and let authors plug into that
> infrastructure. Example syntax:
>
> > <html>
> > <script>
> > if (window.outerWidth >= 600)
> > document.css.properties["inventedConditional"] = true;
> > }
> > </script>
> > <style>
> > @media (property("inventedConditional")) {
> > .facet_sidebar {
> > display: none;
> > }
> > }
> > </style>
> > </html>
>
> I really like this idea. It fits into my general goals of making CSS
> more user-serviceable, and neatly solves the problem brought up in the
> previous thread without having to wait for me to write Variables 2 and
> solve the more generic problems.
>
> I don't think I like Alex's suggested names, though - I'd use
> "document.css.customMedia" or something, and then use a shorter
> function name than "property()". Perhaps we could settle on a naming
> scheme that avoids the need for a function altogether.
>
>
What about just:
> <html>
> <script>
> if (window.outerWidth >= 600)
> document.css.media.huge = true;
> }
> </script>
> <style>
> @media ("huge") {
> .facet_sidebar {
> display: none;
> }
> }
> </style>
> </html>
> Thoughts?
>
> ~TJ
>
>
Received on Friday, 31 May 2013 18:18:46 UTC