- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2008 16:50:44 -0800
- To: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- CC: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, www-style@w3.org
Karl Dubost wrote: > > Hi Anne, > > Le 7 févr. 2008 à 07:13, Anne van Kesteren a écrit : >> In >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Sep/0028.html >> >> you wondered why the url() syntax was discouraged and we replied in >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Oct/0006.html >> >> with an explanation. However, we have since then changed our views on >> the matter and both strings and url() syntax are fine now. > > cool. > > Checking the Editor's draft. > > http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-namespace/#syntax > > The syntax for the @namespace rule is as follows (using the notation > from the Grammar appendix of CSS 2.1 [CSS21]): > > namespace > : NAMESPACE_SYM S* [namespace_prefix S*]? [STRING|URI] S* ';' S* > ; > namespace_prefix > : IDENT > ; > > It is said: > "A URI string parsed from the URI syntax must be treated as a literal > string: as with the STRING syntax, no URI-specific normalization is > applied." > > Just a question: > what is a URI-specific normalization? resolving relative URIs to absolute, converting URI escapes, matching case-insensitively for case-insensitive parts of the URI etc. ~fantasai
Received on Thursday, 7 February 2008 00:51:10 UTC