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

Re: [CSS21] Unclear applicability to XML

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 03:48:41 +0200
Message-ID: <89519004.20050830034841@w3.org>
To: Malcolm Rowe <malcolm-www-style@farside.org.uk>
Cc: www-style@w3.org

On Thursday, August 25, 2005, 5:32:40 PM, Malcolm wrote:

MR> On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 03:39:55PM +0200, Chris Lilley wrote:
>> The abstract says that CSS 2.1 is for "to structured documents (e.g.,
>> HTML documents and XML applications)" but then removes items (relative
>> to CSS2.0) such as @font-face because they have not been implemented in
>> HTML browsers, regardless of whether they have been implemented with XML
>> applications.

MR> Speaking only for myself, I can't see that CSS 2.1 provides any specific
MR> information as to why @font-face was removed, other than the general
MR> statement that the specification "consists of all CSS features that are
MR> implemented interoperably".

MR> Or are you saying that we already have two interoperable XML user agents
MR> that support @font-face?

I had said that a number of times on that list, with largely
unsatisfactory answers.

Of course, if CSS2.1 is primarily aimed at (X)HTML browsers then it
certainly true that there was only one implementation of font download
using @font-face.  However, CSS2.1 is not clear on that point, hence
some other comments that push for clarity there.

If however CSS2.1 is aimed at XML applications as well, as parts of it
claim, then yes indeed there are interoperable implementations of font
download using @font-face and have been for years.



-- 
 Chris Lilley                    mailto:chris@w3.org
 Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
 W3C Graphics Activity Lead
Received on Tuesday, 30 August 2005 01:48:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:40 GMT