- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 23:21:43 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time)
- To: Tantek Celik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
- cc: <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, 29 Mar 2001, Tantek Celik wrote: > > This paragraph summed it up nicely: > > James Aylard wrote: > >> The Mozilla interpretation seems to argue for theoretical purity (as >> defined by its own interpretation), whereas it seems there is room >> for a little more pragmatic common sense. But I'm not arguing that this interpretation is the only valid one! > I have defined in this public forum what we do with the 'normal' > value, and our reasons for doing so (backward compatibility with > common use). And I've given a description of a model in which this can be described within the spec. Frankly I do not understand what you believe the spec says vs what you believe the spec should say. -- Ian Hickson )\ _. - ._.) fL Invited Expert, CSS Working Group /. `- ' ( `--' The views expressed in this message are strictly `- , ) -> ) \ personal and not those of Netscape or Mozilla. ________ (.' \) (.' -' ______
Received on Friday, 30 March 2001 02:19:19 UTC