W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 2001

Re: comments on WD-css3-values-20010713

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 06:05:13 +0200
Message-ID: <3B565C78.820C1407@w3.org>
To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
CC: www-style@w3.org, howcome@opera.com


Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:


>   6. special cases (e.g. "color: #F00" and "font-size: Helvetica")
>   Must be "font-family: Helvetica" 

clearly

> and should be "font-family: Helvetica, sans-serif"

agreed.

> 3.1. Keywords:
>   ... Keywords are never quoted.
>   I suggest: Keywords must not be quoted.

Yes, that makes conformance criteria more consistent.

> 3.3.1. Lengths:
> 
>   When specified for the root of the document tree (e.g., "HTML" in
>   HTML), 'em' and 'ex' refer to the property's initial value.
> We recently discussed this on www-style@w3.org. Is this an error or why
> did the CSS WG decide to break with the common XML terminology? I
> strongly suggest: "... for the root element of the document ..."

I agree and indeed, from the DOM point of view, the root element and the
root node are different (because ther can be other tings besides the
root element atthe same level, like PI, comments, etc.

>   Absolute lengthunits are only useful when the physical properties of
>   the output medium are known. The absolute units are:
> Missing white-space.
Right. For CSS2 we had a script that checked for 

this will have<foo
attr="bar">missing</foo> whitespace
 
> 3.4. Strings:

>   Strings can either be written with double quotes or with single
>   quotes. Double quotes cannot occur inside double quotes, unless
>   escaped (as '\"' or as '\22'). Analogously for single quotes
>   ("\'" or "\27").
>   I suggest adding a comment that escapes refer to ISO/IEC 10646:2000
>   code points

Any particular reason to cite that particular version of 10646, and why
no just cite Unicode (or Unicode 3.2 if a particular versio is needed,
which I don't think it is).

>   A string cannot directly contain a newline. To include a newline in a
>   string, use the escape "\A" (hexadecimal A is the line feed character
>   in Unicode, but represents the generic notion of "newline" in CSS).
>   See the 'content' property for an example.
>   I suggest adding "... line feed character in Unicode (U+000A), ..."
Yes. Probably should mention that its the generic linefeed character in
XML as well.

> 
> 3.5.2. URIs:
>   URLs(Uniform Resource Locators, see [RFC1738] and [RFC1808]) provide
>   the address of a resource on the Web. An expected new way of
>   identifying resources is called URN(Uniform Resource Name). Together
>   they are called URIs(Uniform Resource Identifiers, see [URI]). This
>   specification uses the term URI.
> [...]
> 
>   There are missing white-spaces. I don't like the discussion here, it
> should be just URI and a reference to RFC 2396. 

Yes, the 'new news' about URN is actually old news and in practice URI
is just the polite way to say URL ;-)

> In order to be
> consistent with XML, RFC 2732 should be referenced, too. 

Yes.

> I suggest
> adding a note on escaping URIs with invalid charcters as in HTML 4.01
> section B.2.1 and XML 1.0 section 4.2.2.
Perhaps. Depends on the current state of play regarding URI references
(since CSS does indeed, like XML, have URI references not URIs.

> 
> 3.6.1. Font families:

>   [Font families are like strings, except one may drop the quotes around
>   them]
>   It should say that generic font family names aren't strings but
> keywords and must not be quoted.
That already seems clear from the may, especially given your earlier
clarification about the must not for keywords.

> 
> 3.6.2. Colors:
> 
>   This section is completly misplaced, there is a CSS Level 3 Color
> Module that defines everything in this section. 

I agree that the apportioning needs to be done with care, but the idea
is that this module is defining types that are then used in other
modules (such as color module) by multiple properties.

> E.g.
> 
> [...]
>   The list of keyword color names is: aqua, black, blue, fuchsia, gray,
>   green, lime, maroon, navy, olive, purple, red, silver, teal, white,
>   and yellow.
> [...]
> 
>   This is according to the current draft of the color module wrong.
Yes. Its way too short. The X11 colors and the UI colors need to be
added.


> As for all CSS Level 3 modules, I'd like to see XHTML be used,
> especially in the Text, i.e.
> 
>   h1 { font-family: serif }
> 
> instead of
> 
>   H1 { font-family: serif }

Yes, I agree. It helps demonstrate that CSS can indeed be used with XML,
as would some non-(X)HTML examples.

> I consider this part of W3Cs role "... to promote its widespread
> deployment."

yes.

Thanks for your careful review.

-- 
Chris
Received on Thursday, 19 July 2001 00:05:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:10 GMT