Bert36 - 8:25 am on Oct 12, 2008 (gmt 0) No, I am *not* the same Bert. I was afraid that question would pop up sooner or later. Perhaps that is why I tried to circumvent the main point.
I agree that the fear of CSS becoming a full fledged programming language is realistic. Introduce constants today, the rest tomorrow and before you know it we have a language of which the core function (styling) becomes secondary to it's possibilities.
BUT, and this is a big BUT; If W3C would see this (and judging from mr. Bos's essay they do) they would guard against such "progression" and still introduce some things that would actually HELP the semantic web. (b.t.w. I would love a discussion such as this on that topic since I feel semantics is the last thing on peoples mind when they design websites).
Constants and equations can actually help CSS become more separate from content/markup. But indeed, it should stop there. As long as W3C keeps things like that they keep control. And here comes the but: When they refuse to give people what they yell for (no matter how idiotic) those people will look for it elsewhere. e.g. in PHP. And before you know it CSS is no longer used as seperate "language" but as an integrated part of PHP. Is that what we want?
If you accept the fact that implementing constants in CSS will bring about a cascade of events that end in chaos, you should also be able to accept that using PHP with CSS will do the same thing.
So I would much rather have a bit of "simple" addition than a "huge" assimilation.
No, I am *not* the same Bert. I was afraid that question would pop up sooner or later. Perhaps that is why I tried to circumvent the main point.