- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 17:09:59 -0800
- To: Xidorn Quan <quanxunzhen@gmail.com>
- Cc: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Xidorn Quan <quanxunzhen@gmail.com> wrote: > There are lots of discussions here around why list-item is fine. Let's try > considering the other side: why do you think adding an alias for them is not > good? If aliasing makes things less confusing for future use, I think it > should be fine. What would be hurt if we do that? "Why not" isn't a good reason to add things to a language. Additions should have a strong justification behind them. Aliasing should only be done when the name is *manifestly* wrong or confusing; imo, it should only be done when we're *deprecating* the previous name as a mistake. Aliasing because "sometimes it's more like this" just invites *more* confusion, as people now have *two* names to refer to everything. This gets *way* worse when there's a whole connected set of names being aliased - it's really confusing if you can set "display: block-with-marker; list-style-position: inside; marker-type: square;" *and have it actually work together*. ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 9 March 2016 01:10:46 UTC