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

Re: [css3-namespace] CSS Qualified Names: Invalid and ignored.

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2008 15:11:41 -0800
Message-ID: <47AA3EAD.800@inkedblade.net>
To: karl@w3.org
CC: www-style@w3.org

karl@w3.org wrote:
> Hi, This is a QA Review comment for "CSS Module: Namespaces" 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-css3-namespace-20060828/ 2006-08-28 2nd WD
> 
> About http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-css3-namespace-20060828/#css-qnames
> 
> 
> [[[ CSS qualified names can be used in (for example) selectors and property values as described
> in other modules. Those modules should define the use of a namespace prefix that has not been
> properly declared as a parsing error that will cause the selector or declaration (etc.) to be
> considered invalid and ignored. ]]]  Why a "SHOULD" here? Let's imagine that two modules define
> two contradictory behavior for handling namespaces not "properly declared". It will be lead to
> difficulties in implementations if not total incompatibilities. The modules should not define
> anything and rely on the rules defined in this module.
> 
> What should do an authoring tool? It seems in this case that it should not ignore at all the
> error and pop up a message to fix it. The spec must define the class of products and apply
> requirements depending on the products.

Clarified as

     CSS qualified names can be used in (for example) selectors and property
     values as described in other modules. Those modules must define handling
     of namespace prefixes that have not been properly declared. Such handling
     should treat undeclared namespace prefixes as a parsing error that will
     cause the selector or declaration (etc.) to be considered invalid and, in
     CSS, ignored.

where "ignored" is linked to the CSS2.1 definition. ("ignored" has a very specific
meaning in CSS parsing. Reporting an error is fine.)

~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 6 February 2008 23:11:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:55:01 GMT