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  
CSS WG.

> 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  
not.

-- 
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