- From: François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>
- Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 21:28:52 +0200
- To: "'fantasai'" <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "'CSS WG'" <www-style@w3.org>, "'Chris Eppstein'" <chris@eppsteins.net>
> > The idea I’ve had is to use a “switch-case” like syntax. This proposal is > certainly audacious but, I think, not extravagant. > > To give you a better idea of what I’ve in mind, I took some examples from > the spec and converted them to the proposed syntax: > > > > grid-template: auto 1fr auto / > > > > header-top: "a a a" header-bottom: > > > > main-top: "b b b" 1fr main-bottom; > > > > grid-template-columns: > > > > a: auto > > > > b: minmax(min-content, 1fr) > > > > b: c: d: repeat(2, e: 40px) > > > > repeat(5, auto); > > > > Syntax-wise, a line name is represented by an identifier followed by a > > colon (except if it’s last token as I propose the last colon can be implied). > > > > What do you think? Do you like it? > > IIRC it's not valid per the core syntax, due to the bare colons. > > Also, I think it's way harder to read. The parentheses syntax works well on a > single line or multiple, without any special indentation scheme, and > represents the logical hierarchy of the track syntax much better. > The line names occur between the lengths representing the tracks, just like > they do in the grid layout model. > > So, no, don't think it's an improvement at all. :) > > ~fantasai To be honest, I did completely forget I even proposed this someday :-) Having to reread it makes me understand your point about readability. Let's all forget this proposal ;-)
Received on Thursday, 7 May 2015 19:29:19 UTC