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

Re: several messages

From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 12:01:54 +0200
Message-Id: <1647DDC6-FA46-438A-AC5B-6E488F6AA009@expway.fr>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>

On Oct 18, 2005, at 21:27, Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Oct 2005, Robin Berjon wrote:
>> Is the CSS WG hereby implying that properties in the general W3C
>> property namespace but not in CSS specifications cannot occur in
>> text/css documents (and perhaps that another media type should be  
>> used)?
> Yes. (This should be clear from the text/css MIME type registration.)

Ok. I guess we need to deprecate CSS for most compound documents  
then? If this issue is not addressed properly, I don't see how I  
could not raise a formal objection at your next transition. Note that  
I don't care how it is solved, it just has to be in a way that does  
not exhibit total disregard, disdain, and disrespect for the rest of  
the world.

> I believe that many issues have been raised over the years along these
> lines (e.g. the fact that 'font' in SVG 1.0 is not compatible with  
> 'font'
> in CSS1 was raised many years ago -- still not addressed, by the way).

To the best of my knowledge this specific issue was never raised,  
despite at least three formal reviews of the SVG specification by the  

> Consider. Would the SVG working group object to the CSS working group
> introducing an <svg:flow> element to the SVG namespace?

If done in coordination and with review from the SVG WG, no, probably  

Robin Berjon
    Senior Research Scientist
    Expway, http://expway.com/
Received on Wednesday, 19 October 2005 10:02:01 GMT

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