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

Re: [CSS21] Style sheet definition

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 03:41:13 +0200
Message-ID: <528201382.20050831034113@w3.org>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: www-style@w3.org

On Tuesday, August 30, 2005, 10:13:29 PM, Ian wrote:

IH> On Mon, 29 Aug 2005, Chris Lilley wrote:
>> 
>> Existing text
>> 
>> Style sheet
>>     A set of statements that specify presentation of a document.
>> 
>> (OK, but very general. Covers CSS, DSSL, XSL, sXBL and indeed Java, Python
>> pretty much any 'set of statements' that produce presentation)

IH> What isn't clear to me is why you would even consider looking in the CSS
IH> spec when you are considering non-CSS languages.


>> Suggested text:
>> 
>> Style sheet
>>     A set of statements that specify presentation of a document.

IH> I don't understand why this definition (without more text as it currently
IH> has) is in any way useful.

Its quoted unchanged from CSS 2.1.

IH> If you consider XSL to be a stylesheet, note that it doesn't match the 
IH> definition above anyway.


>> CSS style sheet
>>     A set of statements, expressed in CSS, that specify
>>     presentation of a document.

IH> The rest of the specification refers to "style sheets", not "CSS style 
IH> sheets", throughout. Certainly we won't agree to putting "CSS" in front of
IH> every occurance of the word "style sheet", that would make it unreadable.

OK, so add that. "in this specification, the term "style sheet" is
considered to mean a CSS style sheet".

IH> These proposals do not seem to be intended to make the spec clearer.

Of course they are! Come off it Ian, I know you want to push back on
most of these suggestions but really, its a simple request for
clarification. CSS 2.1 does not need to define all style sheets for all
languages. Its as simple as that. Definitions in specs get re-used in
other specs. So, be clear that your definition is of a CSS style sheet.

Its that simple.

IH> There aren't actually any ambiguities here unless you specifically
IH> are trying to misread the spec.

Or unless you are trying to somehow define what other style sheet
languages do.

IH> If you would like us to mark this issue as unresolved in the disposition
IH> of comments, let us know. However, as it currently stands, we reject this
IH> proposed change on the grounds that it would merely make the specification
IH> more confusing.

I will convey the rejection to the WGs. Its a shame that you resist so
strongly makin the spec clearer.



-- 
 Chris Lilley                    mailto:chris@w3.org
 Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
 W3C Graphics Activity Lead
Received on Wednesday, 31 August 2005 01:42:09 GMT

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