W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2005

Re: Targeting CSS3 only (evil?), either with pseudoclass or an extra syntax for properties.

From: Ben Ward <benmward@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 22:43:47 +0100
Message-ID: <ef5d0f2f0504071443349cfd2@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: Emrah BASKAYA <emrahbaskaya@hesido.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>


While I accept (and hold a great respect and admiration for) the /aim/
of CSS has always been to create properties that act independently,
I'm not sure that this has been achieved in all cases. It's these
cases that I'm concerned may be constraining in embracing new CSS. Of
course the question is whether those cases are really deemed

Take this example:

| When using the opacity property in CSS3, it is concievable and 
| likely that an author will overlay a semi-transparent image over the 
| top of some other content. In this case, if opacity is not supported
| then the overlayed image would obscure content and make the 
| page unusable.
| In this situation, the positioning of that image is dependent on the
| implementation of opacity in the user agent. If opacity is not
| supported, it would be desirable to position the image differently 
| in the page so as not to break it.

So, with regard to the above scenario and any similar others that may
arise in future. Is it in the WGs vision that CSS should have some
means of handling such conflicts? Or are scenarios such as this
accepted as 'inevitable without resolution' as the CSS vocabulary
grows larger?

By "some means", I don't mean to specifically refer to this
discussion. I simply mean "any solution that meets some set of
requirements that the WG have in mind".

Thanks Ian.


On Apr 6, 2005 11:30 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Emrah BASKAYA wrote:
> >
> > It may be correct for this example because it uses multiple-value
> > syntax, but what about other properties? (just repeat the same propery
> > using commas trick?) and let's remember most think that we need more
> > than a CSS3 scheme, the discussion shifted to "Conditional CSS sections
> > based on property support".
> I don't really want to get involved in the rest of the thread (which is
> only rehashing ideas that have been proposed for over half a decade), but
> as far as using new properties and new values, the whole design of CSS is
> structured around the idea that compliant CSS UAs will ignore new
> constructs that they don't support, so that old and new can be used in
> parallel with UAs using just the bits they support.
> --
> Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
> http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
> Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Thursday, 7 April 2005 21:43:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:17 UTC