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

Re: thoughts on non-compliant browsers

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 00:33:14 +0000 (UTC)
To: Robert Koberg <rob@koberg.com>
Cc: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0403080031520.16856@dhalsim.dreamhost.com>

On Sun, 7 Mar 2004, Robert Koberg wrote:
>
> hmph... I did not know something like 'pixel' was redefineable -- I
> would never have thought to look.  Are there other common/pre-defined
> things that CSS redefines?

Presumably, since you walked in here saying that browsers were
non-compliant, you have already read the specification, and thus are
already aware of all these things. So why do you ask?

(And yes. 'em', for instance, is another term that has a different meaning
in CSS than in traditional typography.)

-- 
Ian Hickson                                      )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
U+1047E                                         /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
http://index.hixie.ch/                         `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Sunday, 7 March 2004 19:33:15 GMT

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