I get what your saying here but basically the article and all responders are dodging the real issue here with this wordplay.
The OP article is actually saying CSS is not terrible. And people who disagree are saying yes in fact css is terrible. It's just a way to be not so on the nose about saying css is a shitty way to do things.
You missed my point which may be my fault as it's a bit obscure the way I said it. Let me rephrase it to be more clear:
I'm saying it's pointless to say or claim css is logical. He's using the term incorrectly. The real argument here is really about whether or not css is shitty or not shitty and using the term logical is not only dodging the point, but also awkwardly using the word logic.
Nah, it isn't.
The colloquial meaning of logical is 'rational' or 'sensible', not technical formal logic.
If you go ask 10 people on the street I doubt even 1 would disagree.
> OP is using the term incorrectly and in a strange way. I understand that most of us can still 'understand' his point but that does not mean he's using the term colloquially or correctly. Think about it.
I've thought about it. I think you're wrong. OP is certainly using 'logical' in the colloquial sense.
> The OP article is actually saying CSS is not terrible. And people who disagree are saying yes in fact css is terrible. It's just a way to be not so on the nose about saying css is a shitty way to do things.
I see your point but I think it is more nuanced. I don't think the claim is 'CSS is terrible', more like 'CSS has a big flaw in that its design doesn't make sense and isn't intuitive', and the OP refutes that by showing that it does make sense i.e. 'is logical'.
> I'm saying it's pointless to say or claim css is logical. He's using the term incorrectly.
I would say he is using the term correctly in a colloquial sense. Besides, you need only search for "css is not logical" for examples of people claiming exactly that.
Taking on a fight that a word is being used incorrectly when it's used that way by a majority is a losing battle.
> The real argument here is really about whether or not css is shitty or not shitty and using the term logical is not only dodging the point, but also awkwardly using the word logic.
I do think the argument is more nuanced than just is/is not terrible, and using the word logical is a way to convey that.
Well, yes and no. It depends on context. You know, nuance.
Like I said, it can be technically logical, but that doesn't mean it is logical in the colloquial sense.
The point made in the article is to refuse a claim that CSS is not logical in the colloquial sense, it is not trying to refute that it is technically logical which is the point you are making.