- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2011 23:39:25 +0100
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
* L. David Baron wrote: >I think we should remove the "Applies To:" lines from our specs. I >think any benefit gained from them is lost by their inaccuracy >(since, given their length, they are often approximations). They've >led to substantial confusion when they've been incorrect (e.g., when >early drafts of transitions said that the properties apply only to >inlines and blocks). The problem probably starts with the fact that neither the field nor the field values link to proper definitions, so it's difficult to find out what values are possible for the field (so you are aware of any gotchas you may have to watch out for, for instance) and what values like "all elements" mean (for example, whether that includes pseudo-elements). I'd think we would need an analysis of how common inaccurate values are; if they are rare, a "but see below" might be better than to strip it from all properties. If the field is kept, it should link to definition and index, and the standardized values should link to their definitions. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
Received on Tuesday, 8 November 2011 22:39:47 UTC