RE: [css-counter-styles] Any chance of requiring a -- prefix on the names?

> On 02/23/2016 04:42 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> > I noted in a recent thread that the allowed name syntax for
> > @counter-style rules was a mistake - allowing them to fill the same
> > namespace as normal keywords meant I have to keep an (updated) list of
> > disallowed keywords, and do some funky things in the spec to handle
> > collisions with existing names.  If I'd written the spec today, I'd
> > have required that the name be a <custom-ident> and start with --, so
> > it's easily distinguishable from anything else.
> >
> > Currently, only Firefox implements @counter-style, but it's been
> > implemented since v33 afaict.  Does anyone (Xidorn?) know the usage
> > here, and is able to comment on whether such a change would be
> > feasible?
> >
> > Alternately, would the group be okay with changing the syntax to
> > <custom-ident>, even if Firefox has to, for legacy reasons, support
> > the wider syntax for some period of time (possibly indefinitely)?
> I'm not convinced we should make this change. @counter-style follows the
> same pattern as @font-face names, animation names, counter names,
> namespace prefixes, etc.
> Given that, I think it is better to leave @counter-style syntax alone.
> ~fantasai

How about a proposal to unify them with how font-family works, then? 
Tab seemed to agree this would solve his issue as well, and that would solve the initial problem of the originating thread, too.

The idea would be to make those properties (animation-name, transition-property, counter-style, font-family, etc...) accept quoted "identifier" or bare identifier if identifier does not start with two dashes.

Details are there:

Received on Wednesday, 24 February 2016 04:19:39 UTC