I have another comment to add to my email.
Look at the css spec definition for pseudo-elements and pseudo-classes
below:
* Pseudo-elements create abstractions about the document tree beyond
those specified by the document language. For instance, document
languages do not offer
I never commented on this email I just realized. See below.
Catalin Kormos wrote:
Hi Adam,
Sorry if this was confusing, i certainly wouldn't want to write a
pretty new
framework for skinning, and this to be used only by Tomahawk. As Martin
mentioned we did compare existing approaches
I don't want to say that css2 syntax would help, just trying to figure out
if it can be possible to provide the same feature using css2 syntax. Parsing
and generating a new css file for the browser must be done in this case
also, and merging child skin's css file with parent skin's css file. 3rd
So are you saying the benefit of css2-syntax instead of css-3 syntax is
that we can use a 3rd party parser, and that is it?
The namespace is in css-3 syntax, but really that is it, right?
As far as the 'states', it is possible for a component to be in more
than one state at a time.
Currently,
Catalin Kormos wrote:
Thanks for bringing the use of CSS3 syntax into discussion, this was
one of
the things that put me a lot into thinking actualy :). From what i can
tell,
all the features you mentioned can be achieved with CSS2 syntax too.
Here is
how i'm imagining to make this work:
Catalin,
I'm +1 on any changes you want to do on the existing framework, but keep
insync with Trinidad's skinning developers (like Jeanne) so that all of this
is used for Trinidad as well - keep in mind that our ultimate goal here is
merging together the different approaches, laying the base for
