括号和CSS的发明 [英] Brackets and the Invention of CSS
问题描述
是否有一些特殊原因让CSS的发明者选择
给我们留下大括号的遗产（其中一个
必须转移）比广场（其中一个简单地按
必须按）？
p [保证金：0;]
是两个短按键然后
p {margin：0;}
乘以css世界几十亿，在
中考虑了很多后果，包括更大的错误赔率b / b
错别字和修订，人们的能源支出增加了b $ b和处理器，键盘上的磨损更多。
-
dorayme
< blockquote> dorayme写道：
是否有一些特殊原因让CSS的发明者选择
给我们留下大括号的遗产（其中一个
必须转移）而不是广场（其中一个只需按
）？
p [保证金：0;]
是两个关键的压力更短然后
p {margin：0;}
乘以css世界几十亿，接受
可以解决很多后果，包括更大的错误赔率和b / b
拼写错误和修订，更多人的能源支出
和处理器，更多键盘磨损。
方括号用于属性选择器。因IE而有用但不经常使用
功能。
-
小心，
Jonathan
-------------------
小作品工作室
< a rel =nofollowhref =http://www.LittleWorksStudio.comtarget =_ blank> http://www.hittleWorksStudio.com
在文章< 4d *************************** @ NAXS.COM>，
" ; Jonathan N. Little < lw ***** @ centralva.netwrote：
dorayme写道：
有没有一个特别的原因，CSS的发明者选择了
给我们留下大括号的遗产（其中一个
必须转移）而不是广场（对于哪一个简单地按b
必须按？）
p [保证金：0;]
是两个按键更短的
p {margin：0;}
乘以css世界数十亿，接受
可以解决很多后果，包括更大的机会，即错误的b / b
拼写错误和修订，人们对能源的支出更多，b $ b和处理器更多，磨损更多键盘。
方括号用于属性选择器。由于IE，一个有用但不经常使用的
功能。
所以...你是暗示预计
方括号会被更频繁地使用吗？ />
-
dorayme
文章
< do * *********************************@news-vip.optusnet.com.au> ;,
dorayme< do ************ @ optusnet.com.auwrote：
发明人是否有某些特殊原因CSS选择
给我们留下大括号的遗产（其中一个
必须按下）而不是正方形（其中一个只是
必须按）？
或许以现有惯例为基础。也许在某些键盘上
方括号实际上更难打字。也许他们扔了一枚硬币。
p [margin：0;]
是短按两次按键
p {margin：0;}
所以p {margin：0}
-
Sander Tekelenburg
网络修复计划：< http://webrepair.org/>
Is there some particular reason that the inventors of CSS chose
to leave us with the legacy of the curly brackets (for which one
has to shift press) rather than the square (for which one simply
has to press)?
p [margin: 0;]
is two key presses shorter then
p {margin: 0;}
Multiply that by a few billion over the world of css, taking in
to account a lot of consequences including the bigger chance of
typos and revisions, the greater expenditure of energy on people
and processors, more wear and tear on the keyboard.
--
dorayme
dorayme wrote:Is there some particular reason that the inventors of CSS chose
to leave us with the legacy of the curly brackets (for which one
has to shift press) rather than the square (for which one simply
has to press)?
p [margin: 0;]
is two key presses shorter then
p {margin: 0;}
Multiply that by a few billion over the world of css, taking in
to account a lot of consequences including the bigger chance of
typos and revisions, the greater expenditure of energy on people
and processors, more wear and tear on the keyboard.
Square brackets are for attribute selectors. A useful but not often used
feature because of IE.
--
Take care,
Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
In article <4d***************************@NAXS.COM>,
"Jonathan N. Little" <lw*****@centralva.netwrote:
dorayme wrote:Is there some particular reason that the inventors of CSS chose
to leave us with the legacy of the curly brackets (for which one
has to shift press) rather than the square (for which one simply
has to press)?
p [margin: 0;]
is two key presses shorter then
p {margin: 0;}
Multiply that by a few billion over the world of css, taking in
to account a lot of consequences including the bigger chance of
typos and revisions, the greater expenditure of energy on people
and processors, more wear and tear on the keyboard.
Square brackets are for attribute selectors. A useful but not often used
feature because of IE.So... are you are implying perhaps that it was anticipated that
the square brackets would have been used more often?
--
dorayme
In article
<do**********************************@news-vip.optusnet.com.au>,
dorayme <do************@optusnet.com.auwrote:
Is there some particular reason that the inventors of CSS chose
to leave us with the legacy of the curly brackets (for which one
has to shift press) rather than the square (for which one simply
has to press)?Perhaps to build upon existing conventions. Perhaps on some keyboards
square brackets actually are harder to type. Perhaps they tossed a coin.
p [margin: 0;]
is two key presses shorter then
p {margin: 0;}So is p {margin:0}
--
Sander Tekelenburg
The Web Repair Initiative: <http://webrepair.org/>
这篇关于括号和CSS的发明的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！
