Re: [css-variables] ...let's change the syntax

On Thursday 2014-03-13 18:20 +0100, François REMY wrote:
> That being said, Custom Properties are only useful once all browsers
> support them (or at least a majority of them that's sufficiently
> broad the justify the use of a polyfill for the others), so I'm not
> enclined to consider this a huge deal. I prefer we trade a bit of
> time for a better design than the opposite.

But we've already done that a bunch of times at various stages in
the process for getting to where we are.  When do we stop?

There is definitely a point where it's more valuable to ship
implementations than to keep polishing.

The impression that the discussions in the WG gave to implementors
was that we were close enough to that point that it was worth
implementing.  The group resolved in January to take variables to
CR, though it hasn't happened yet.

If the WG is too unwilling to stabilize and ship features, then the
only way that CSS features will end up being stable is when Web
compatibility requires it.  This, in turn, encourages implementors
to just ship CSS features without the consent of the WG (which has
happened plenty of times in the past few years, I'd note) and then
rely on the Web depending on those features to freeze them.  It's
particularly discouraging (and counterproductive) when the features
that have this problem are the most highly-demanded ones -- because
they tend to attract the most commentary.

-David

-- 
𝄞   L. David Baron                         http://dbaron.org/   𝄂
𝄢   Mozilla                          https://www.mozilla.org/   𝄂
             Before I built a wall I'd ask to know
             What I was walling in or walling out,
             And to whom I was like to give offense.
               - Robert Frost, Mending Wall (1914)