Re: [css-text][css-flexbox] Let's just alias "nowrap" with "no-wrap"

On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 11:37 PM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Oct 10, 2014, at 8:09 AM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 11:38 PM, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 10 Oct 2014 04:05:18 +0200, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
> ...
>>>>
>>>> Anyone have objections to us just aliasing the value as "no-wrap"?
>>>> That way, in a few years, people can just do the logical thing and use
>>>> the value they expect, rather than having to deal with this wart
>>>> forever.
>>>
>>>
>>> I don't particularly like that idea. I think in general old syntax should be
>>> left alone. Adding aliases is not zero cost.
>>>
>>> But if this one thing is a major pain point for authors, then maybe it's
>>> worth it. Is it?
>>
>> I forget it almost every time I use the the stupid value, and I hear
>> grumblings about it relatively constantly.  It's also the *very first*
>> mistake on <https://wiki.csswg.org/ideas/mistakes>.
>
> If we do that, can we also alias 'border-radius' into 'corner-radius'? I know this confuses many people into thinking it is only for when you have visible borders, when really it's affect is just as dramatic on a filled-in background with no borders. It looks like it belongs with the other 'border-*' properties that are components of the 'border' shorthand, but it doesn't (it isn't).

We've got a lot of confusing names, but I think "nowrap" is extra
special here, particularly since it's in a property which is already
difficult to tell whether it's one or two words.  "border-radius" is
less than great, but I dunno if it's worth enough to change the name.

(And I don't want to get this topic derailed with slippery slope fears!)

~TJ

Received on Sunday, 12 October 2014 07:04:19 UTC