W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > December 2016

Re: [css3-selectors]: Proposal: :in-view() selector for better visibility control

From: Andrea Rendine <master.skywalker.88@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 20:24:30 +0100
Message-ID: <CAGxST9k-C6-HVe25qxC3ziSPfuDOzRJV=r_HfC40_fTS=dTQ=A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alexander Shpack <shadowkin@gmail.com>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
I have nothing to do with UAs developing, I'm a web developer like
you. And like you I try to find out native ways to do things.

Thus said, websites run on user agents. So,

> let's take away from your heads browser development mind and look on the problem as a web developers

I think this is not possible. Because it's the browser which has to
execute all the fancy commands we insert as HTML and CSS.

And you can do whatever you want on your web app in order to make it
work best, and it's your problem and yours only to debug it when it
doesn't work. On the other hand, when a UA adopts a feature and makes
it native, it has to reliably take care of both physiological and
pathological cases.

You want your feature to work as a snapshot rather than a live tree
implementation. Ok, fine. But what happens when a web app ends up
being interactive to the point that, for example, new nodes are added
above the in-view-ish stuff thus influencing the way it is displayed?
Or what happens when the window is forcibly being recalculated, as it
happens when a window is resized?

You have an idea in mind of how you want your app to be used. You can
ignore possible loops, maybe because your app is done in such a way
that applying in-view styles is not recursive. You also have no
dynamically inserted elements. But when user agents make this native,
they will have to write code in order to exclude such cases.

> :hover can produce loop and it's ok. My proposal can produce the same loops and it's bad. No, bad is not enough, it's BAD.

You got the point. The web is full enough of features which cause
trouble. Even though workarounds have been found, they are often
unstable; for sure they are less stable than what a programmer can do
on its own platform. I guess developers can choose between learning
from errors or adding new ones because, hey, browsers got used to deal
with crazy stuff, why not introducing new headaches? Try guess which
way is preferable.
Received on Tuesday, 6 December 2016 19:25:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 December 2016 19:25:04 UTC