Comments on: New features proposed for CSS

By: JavaScript in CSS, Ugly But Intresting | dtsn

JavaScript in CSS, Ugly But Intresting | dtsn — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 10:52:10 +0000

[...] Expression suddenly came to me as a solution for the currently much debated feature (here and here) of variables in CSS3. This could theoretically be currently achieved through the use of CSS [...]

By: Exec

Exec — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 19:02:14 +0000

Have you tried $(’element a:not(:hover)’)? else you have events mouseout and mousein (or was it mouseover?).

Another thing you could do is to use a gif/apng that doesn’t loop. That should work in most browsers I think.

text-overflow sets the behavior of overflowing text when you have limited height and width while word-wrap sets whether words are allowed to be broken up between lines when the horizontal space isn’t enough. Putting these two together would be illogical. If you’re going to group text-overflow. grouping with the rest of the text-* properties would be more like the font case; same goes for word-wrap.

By: Tony

Tony — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 14:55:34 +0000

I agree with you regarding the visual effects thing. I’d like to note that I love CSS and hate JavaScript (although JQuery has gone a long way toward making me like it more). I don’t think CSS should bother with animations, with one caveat: I’ve always wanted to be able to add simple animations to :hover styles. I can do this with JQuery, but I want the :hover to work just like it does now if the user has JavaScript turned off, with the extra animation if they’ve got it on.

I’ve poked around for a while, but so far the only way to do this seems to require some code duplication. (I just want to write a quick script that says something to the effect of, “$(‘element a:hover’).fadeIn();”, although that leaves me scratching my head because there is no *:unhover . :)

Is it my imagination, or have the W3C gone way downhill after all the corporations (esp. Microsoft) became members? It seems that new proposals are become more poorly thought out every time I happen to come across any. A ‘word-wrap’ property? WTF? Shouldn’t this be part of ‘text-overflow’? At least as an optional value for ‘text-overflow’ that could be added after its standard values, much like the multiple values used in the shorthand properties for ‘border’, ‘font’, or ‘background’.

Sigh.

Just found this site, BTW. Fantastic website, this. Great work! :)

By: dtsn : JavaScript in CSS, ugly, but intresting

dtsn : JavaScript in CSS, ugly, but intresting — Mon, 12 May 2008 14:15:10 +0000

By: Brendan Falkowski

Brendan Falkowski — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 16:32:09 +0000

CSS Variables would be killer useful. No more copy pasting or find/replacing.

By: Mik Fielding

Mik Fielding — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 23:40:33 +0000

It’s all very well, but CSS 2 has been with us for ten years now and none of the currently available browsers fully support it. The most widely used browser, the utterly horrible Internet Explorer (the most hated browser among web designers) has never been able to support any of the proper recognised standards.

Microsoft seem to be very much against supporting a browser that adheres to any standards not invented by them, so unless IE dies a much deserved death CSS 3 will probably never live up to any of it’s promises anyway.

Shame really because as a designer I would welcome many of the new proposals…

By: Nicholas

Nicholas — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 14:34:21 +0000

I must say, these look very nice. The syntax for the variables seems very sensible, so we will probably see implementations for this in dev builds long before the rest of the properties. I also like the idea of moving animation to the browser and out of javascript, which should make the rendering smoother (anything being done in C++ should be quicker than JS). The proposals also seem sensible in that you usually want the animations to interact with the page, so they link it in with DOM events.

By: The New Cult of Dead Cow » Blog Archive » Mejoras propuestas para CSS

The New Cult of Dead Cow » Blog Archive » Mejoras propuestas para CSS — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 04:28:33 +0000

[...] ese motivo en css3info, han publicado una lista de sugerencias para incorporar nuevas funcionalidades al [...]

By: Remebering the old has always been important

Remebering the old has always been important — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 21:58:37 +0000

Why must someone always fight for the old? The thing about the old is that it worked. So if you want something fully developed stick with the old. If not go with the new.

I say make it compatible but not at the expense of time. If people hate it they will upgrade. I stick with the old and that is my choice. My clients want what is new. Use the tried and tested.

By: Stifu

Stifu — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 19:15:17 +0000

I agree with Emil… Whether software or hardware related, I think backward compatibility is overrated.
Besides, if browsers implement and optimize these features, even old computers could be good to go.