W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xhtml2@w3.org > March 2008

Re: [css3-namespace] Last call comments from XHTML2 WG

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 09:29:37 +0100
To: "Steven Pemberton" <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>, "XHTML WG" <public-xhtml2@w3.org>
Cc: "Forms WG" <public-forms@w3.org>, www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.t7x4jnrc64w2qv@annevk-t60.oslo.opera.com>

On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 16:42:07 +0100, Steven Pemberton  
<steven.pemberton@cwi.nl> wrote:
> In the context of the following
>
> 	@namespace "http://example.org/ns"
> 	
> 	foo {color: green}
>
> with a non-namespaced CSS processor all elements named foo will be green,
> while with a namespaced processor, only elements in the namespace named
> will be green.
>
> This seems to break an axiom of CSS versioning that later versions of CSS
> should not change the processing of earlier versions; it will therefore
> make it hard to make a stylesheet that works regardless of the presence  
> of namespace processing.
>
> It would seem better if unqualified names continue to behave in the same
> way as non-namespaced processors, and that to select a particular
> namespaced version of an element, you should always use a qualified name.

We discussed this and since @namespace has been around for a long time it  
would probably break more if we removed the ability to do default  
namespaces in CSS. In its almost nine years of existence this hasn't been  
a problem really and we expect it to be not much of a hassle going  
forward. Please let us know if you disagree with this response.


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Thursday, 13 March 2008 08:29:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 23 February 2010 18:12:48 GMT