W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > May 2015

Re: [css-cascade-4][css3-ui] naming collision: the "default" value

From: Bruno Racineux <bruno@hexanet.net>
Date: Fri, 01 May 2015 15:36:35 -0700
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>, Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
CC: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D1694114.974F7%bruno@hexanet.net>


On 5/1/15 6:22 AM, "fantasai" <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:

>I'd have been ok with 'reset' (since it effectively "resets" the state
>to what it was at the beginning of your cascade origin), but this is a
>good point.
>
>However, I also don't want to use a term that is technically *incorrect*
>(which makes it *more* difficult for people to understand how things
>actually work!) so ua-default or browser-default or anything like that
>is IMHO not acceptable.

I agree. I don't think 'ua' or 'default' properly convey what it does.

If the feature resets to the previous origin. Why not call it like it is:
'origin'? Or 'reset-origin'. But 'reset' doesn't have much value either.

'initial' already refers to a previous state. i.e. 'reset-to-initial-state'

'origin' carries the same meaning, with an added technical education value.

>On 4/23/15 5:47 AM, "Simon Pieters" <simonp@opera.com> wrote:
>Origin on the Web usually means origin as in the same-origin-policy.

Unless 'origin' has some kind of future application relative to
'same-origin-policy' for which it should be reserved for. I don't see an
issue using that keyword for CSS since it matches the spec terminology.
Received on Friday, 1 May 2015 22:37:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:53 UTC