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

Re: [validator] Proprietary extensions

From: Ben Ward <benmward@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 16:03:00 +0100
Message-ID: <ef5d0f2f0510110803j4c8e5d5v@mail.gmail.com>
To: www-style@w3.org

> whereas it could return only warning
>    Only syntax checked for proprietary extension: -moz-border-radius
>
It doesn't sound unreasonable to return a better message when you can
handle prop. extensions in that way.

> Validator could also strip the vendor identifier from proprietary
> properties and then try to validate the remaining property. For
> example, "-moz-border-radius: 1em" would be mapped to
> "border-radius: 1em". This way, some of the vendor extensions could
> be sort-of-validated.

That wouldn't be such a good idea though. Mozilla provide a good
example in that, at time of writing, their implementation of CSS3
border-radius (-moz-border-radius) takes different parameters (or
interprets them differently, one of them). They often use their prefix
for testing stuff which, ultimatley, isn't guarenteed to be correct.
If the CSS validator were to say 'Correct syntax is xyz' then it will
only confuse users, since they could 'correct' their syntax and find
that it behaves unexpectedly.

So, yes giving some recognition of valid extension syntax would be
welcome, but trying to make assumptions about how they might be used
would be confusing.

Ben
http://ben-ward.co.uk
Received on Tuesday, 11 October 2005 15:03:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:41 GMT