W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2008

Re: [css3-namespace] Last call comments from XHTML2 WG

From: T.V Raman <raman@google.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 14:15:22 -0700
Message-ID: <18419.63338.171934.333767@retriever.corp.google.com>
To: daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com
Cc: steven.pemberton@cwi.nl, dbaron@dbaron.org, derhoermi@gmx.net, www-style@w3.org, public-forms@w3.org, public-xhtml2@w3.org

Daniel,
Yes, CSS having explicit versioning would be one way to fix this
once and for all.

But given that the CSS group insists that it will never need
versioning --- analogous to hTML asserting it's the same across
versions (another assertion I dont believe)--
the Last Call issue raised by the forms and xhtml groups is
particularly telling. Given where we are in the email discussion,
I'd recommend that the Forms and XHTML  WGs change this to a
"formal LC objection " 


Daniel Glazman writes:
 > 
 > Steven Pemberton wrote:
 > 
 > >     * Because of CSS's versioning mechanism, it is a Bad Thing if rules 
 > > change meaning across versions
 > 
 > Steven, that's the point : CSS has no versions... only levels.
 > I have said many times in the past that we now need to get rid
 > of levels to move to versions.
 > 
 > </Daniel>

-- 
Best Regards,
--raman

Title:  Research Scientist      
Email:  raman@google.com
WWW:    http://emacspeak.sf.net/raman/
Google: tv+raman 
GTalk:  raman@google.com, tv.raman.tv@gmail.com
PGP:    http://emacspeak.sf.net/raman/raman-almaden.asc
Received on Wednesday, 2 April 2008 21:16:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:55:04 GMT