- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2011 00:15:17 -0400
- To: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
- CC: www-style@w3.org
On 11/2/11 12:01 AM, Charles Pritchard wrote:
> Sure, authors risk slowness when using CSS.
And UAs risk slowness and resulting user flight when implementing CSS
features that are slow-by-design. This isn't a theoretical problem, and
it's incentive for UAs to not implement such features....
> Oh, I need to catch up on that reading to see what areas were
> purposefully broken or unimplemented.
<style>
div::first-letter { color: green; }
</style>
<div>First letter should go green when hovered</div>
does not work in Gecko, for example. Nor in WebKit, for that matter.
Presto gets this right.
> Would using content replacement techniques help with the situation?
Help the above? I doubt it.
> ::first-letter { display: none; } /* incomplete */
> ::first-letter:before { content "A"; }
Implementing _that_ seems strictly harder than just implementing
::first-letter, no?
>> The CSS 2.1 one, or the CSS3 one? No one implements the latter, and
>> implementations of the former are somewhat buggy and inconsistent....
>
> At this point, CSS is a lot like HTML -- a living standard.
That doesn't answer my question.
> Large swaths of the spec are not implemented
And never will be, if you include all past working drafts in "the spec".
HTML doesn't have this problem; stuff that's obviously not planned to be
implemented either goes away or is clearly marked so.
> I suppose the spec is quite a bit more amazing than the reality of
> implementations.
If by "the spec" you mean "whatever someone felt like writing down in a
working draft", then pretty much by definition yes. ;)
> Still, the implementations with the spec provide for some precedent I
> believe I can build on.
Not sure what you mean.
-Boris
Received on Wednesday, 2 November 2011 04:23:15 UTC