W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2014

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

From: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 22:58:19 +0000
To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
CC: François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>, "Chris Eppstein" <chris@eppsteins.net>, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <939BC4DA-07B2-43EF-B631-1627047997E8@adobe.com>

On Mar 13, 2014, at 10:45 PM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote:

> 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.

I fully agree with this statement. I think Tab’s argumentation to use underscores because customized media queries might or might not end up with underscored names is very weak. The Custom Properties proposal is on the table for a very long time now. Not all of us might be happy with it but discussing any further change (even minimal!) opens pandoras box. I think this thread just confirms it.

And because we don’t know if media queries will really end up with underscores in the name at the end, I do not think we should base the discussion on it. -var- was a compromise and I do believe we should not change this at this point but publish CR ASAP if not done yet.

Greetings,
Dirk

> 
> -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)

Received on Friday, 14 March 2014 22:58:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:14:38 UTC