On 23 April 2015 at 08:33, Daniel Tan <lists@novalistic.com> wrote: > On 4/23/2015 10:23 AM, Brad Kemper wrote: > >> >> 'ua-default' seems too jargony to me. I suspect there is a huge >> percentage of authors writing CSS that don't know what 'ua' stands for, or >> even what a "user agent" is. >> >> > Unfortunately (?!) I can't claim to be one of those authors. The term > "ua-default" makes perfect sense to me. Maybe we could take this > opportunity to educate authors on the terminology used in the > specifications? > I agree. Even if authors don't know what the abbreviation 'ua' stands for, it will be very easy for them to get to know about what 'ua-default' does when doing a quick internet search. > The next best alternative would be "browser-default", but the word > "browser" alone takes up just as many bytes as "default". Ew. > ... and is incorrect in combination with other types of user agents. SebastianReceived on Thursday, 23 April 2015 07:40:46 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:53 UTC