W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2004

RE: [css3-page] Is auto a page identifier or not?

From: Ernest Cline <ernestcline@mindspring.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:27:56 -0500
Message-ID: <410-220042311152756171@mindspring.com>
To: "BIGELOW,JIM (HP-Boise,ex1)" <jim.bigelow@hp.com>
Cc: "W3C CSS List" <www-style@w3.org>




> [Original Message]
> From: BIGELOW,JIM (HP-Boise,ex1) <jim.bigelow@hp.com>

Whoa there!  I can see the reason (altho I disagree with it) for
rejecting "auto" as an identifier, but not ALL keywords.  Whether
something that fits the production for an identifier happens to be
a keyword will depend upon what portions of CSS it implements.
Do you really want a standard that would require an as yet
undefined keyword from a future CSS recommendation to be
invalid?  That is sure to lead to problems with interoperability.

> Your issue (#44) shown below has been rejected.  There are many uses of
> "auto" in the CSS specification as a unique keyword that assumes specific
> values and meanings that are unique to the property. So I don't think it
is
> right to, in this instance, say it is an identifier.  However, it keeping
> with the way the auto assumes property specific means, when used as a
> keyword it could take on the meaning of the unnamed page context when used
> with the page property.  In keeping with "auto" being a polymorphic
keyword
> and not an identifier "@page auto" should be a syntax error in the same
way
> that "@page table-row" should be an error since auto or table-row are
> keywords and not identifiers.
>
> If you have further comment on this issue, you have seven days, until Feb.
> 17, 2004 to reply.
>
>  -- Jim Bigelow, editor
>
> Your issue:
> > In the 'page' property is the value of "auto" to be treated 
> > as identifier or not? 
Received on Wednesday, 11 February 2004 10:28:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:26 GMT