W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > September 1999

Re: Minor error in CSS2, section 14.2; 'background'

From: Kishore Kulkarni <kulkarni@pathcom.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 1999 21:13:58 -0400
Message-ID: <00aa01bf0560$eaad79e0$6491fad1@kulkarni.pathcom.com>
To: "Chris Lilley" <chris@w3.org>, "gordon" <gordon@quartz.gly.fsu.edu>
Cc: "'www-style'" <www-style@w3.org>
Kartik is not on this email anymore.  Please do not send any mail to

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
To: gordon <gordon@quartz.gly.fsu.edu>
Cc: 'www-style' <www-style@w3.org>
Date: Tuesday, September 21, 1999 5:52 PM
Subject: Re: Minor error in CSS2, section 14.2; 'background'

>gordon wrote:
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Braden N. McDaniel <braden@shadow.net>
>> > If the HTML node had "historically not been rendered", we would not be
>> able
>> > to see HTML documents in browsers! The BODY and HEAD nodes are children
>> > the HTML node. Thus, if the HTML node is not rendered, by definition
>> > would not be able to see its children.
>> This is downright silly as it asserts that one faces an all-or-nothing
>> scenario in which case one would also render the head node as well.
>No, not silly at all. And not an all or nothing scenario either, except
>that it is I suppose all or nothing on a per element basis.
>It just requires looking at a tree structured view. Or to put it another
>way, noting that an element includes its start tag, its end tag, and all
>of its content (including its children).
>So clearly, the HTML element is rendered - otherwise nothing would be
>seen. And clearly, the HEAD element is not rendered. In other words
>html > head {display: none }
>html > body {display: block }
>html { display: none}
>which would produce completely empty result trees and thus, no content.
Received on Wednesday, 22 September 1999 21:07:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:26:51 UTC