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

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

From: Marat Tanalin <mtanalin@yandex.ru>
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 05:10:15 +0300
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-Id: <866051457662215@web17m.yandex.ru>
10.03.2016, 00:25, "fantasai" <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>:
> ššššOn 03/08/2016 03:27 PM, Marat Tanalin wrote:
>> ššššš24.02.2016, 00:46, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>:
>>> šššššthe allowed name syntax for @counter-style rules was a mistake -
>>
>> šššššAs for @counter-style in particular, it's better late than never.
>> šššššGiven that there is just one implementation, just add the prefix.
>
> CSS consistently uses undifferentiated identifiers for such things.

The fact that there were mistakes (regardless of their number) in the past (that we cannot change) is alone probably not a reason to make similar mistakes over and over again in the future (that we can control).

By the way, I'm not sure that a prefix is the best option to avoid name collisions in such cases. I would probably prefer a dedicated function like `counter-style()` on use while keeping the definition syntax as is:

    @counter-style foobar {
        /* ... */
    }

    .example {
        list-style: counter-style(foobar);
    }

This way, we would consistently have the same prefix-free identifier on both definition and use. Possible confusion with CSS variables in terms of syntax would be avoided as well (in general, it's probably not a great idea at all to use the CSS-variables' prefix for something not related to CSS variables).
Received on Friday, 11 March 2016 02:10:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:09:01 UTC