W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-core-wg@w3.org > May 2005

Re: CSS selectors and xml:id

From: Anne van Kesteren <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
Date: Mon, 09 May 2005 13:01:00 +0200
Message-ID: <427F42EC.1000406@annevankesteren.nl>
To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
CC: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, www-style@w3.org, public-xml-core-wg@w3.org

Chris Lilley wrote:
> HST> Personally I would settle for DTD and W3C XML Schema in some detail,
> HST> refer to 'other/external methods' and give xml:id as an e.g.
> 
> That  would be suboptimal, for example there would be no conformance
> requirement and thus no xml:id samples in the test suite.

Really, why should the *CSS* test suite check for conformance on xml:id? 
Really, theoretically you can implement just for HTML or for neither XML 
nor HTML and still be conformant I believe.

Also, the arguments given that Amaya supports xml:id and that now only 
one other browser has to support it to meet the requirements is nonsense 
as Amaya hasn't implemented all of CSS.

Two interoperable implementations means that there are two 
implementations which implement *every* feature of the specification in 
an interoperable way. You can't say those two implementations support 
that feature and those two support that, et cetera. There have to be two 
implementations that support all of it and are interoperable.


-- 
  Anne van Kesteren
  <http://annevankesteren.nl/>
Received on Monday, 9 May 2005 11:01:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:32 GMT