- From: François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>
- Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2014 13:21:04 +0200
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "Lea Verou" <lea@verou.me>
- Cc: "www-style list" <www-style@w3.org>
> I'm weakly in favor of a concat() function, but given that we already > have math relegated to the calc() function, I don't think I'm opposed > to a naked + character doing string concatenation, as it won't be > ambiguous. It would need to be strict about its types; that is, > actually requires <string> values on either side, but I think that's > just fine. I'll admit I'm scratching my head over this one. Concatenating strings is a fringe use case on a layout system like CSS, while adding numbers is something really common. Optimizing one and not the other [1] looks to be a huge prioritization mistake to me. If mathematics are not worth more than a "calc" function, I see no reason explaining string concatenation would be worth an inline syntax. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Jun/0411.html ___________________________________ PS: I also believe it would be a first (in CSS) that generic tokens can be combined together using a non-whitespace separator but no grouping at all. That looks strange to me.
Received on Saturday, 19 July 2014 11:21:00 UTC