W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2012

Re: [CSS21] WD 4.2: invalid at-keywords

From: Peter Moulder <peter.moulder@monash.edu>
Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2012 21:26:15 +1100
To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-id: <20120203102615.GA19249@bowman.infotech.monash.edu.au>
Thank you for replying at length, though I'm sorry to say that you
missed this follow-up -- perhaps because of using the buggy web archive
to read www-style:

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Apr/0086.html

I've delaying replying for a couple of days partly because I'm sorry that
you've spent the time analysing the problem in detail, and don't like bearing
the bad news.

The least I can do now is to try to find the thread referred to in that message.
Looking just for messages sent by me and that contain the string "pars" ignoring case,
the following look relevant and include the information I was thinking of:

  http://www.w3.org/mid/20110107194042.GC21438@bowman.infotech.monash.edu.au
  http://www.w3.org/mid/20110306141647.GA16349@bowman.infotech.monash.edu.au
  http://www.w3.org/mid/20110307023114.GA17954@bowman.infotech.monash.edu.au
  http://www.w3.org/mid/20110307053404.GB17954@bowman.infotech.monash.edu.au

(The following doesn't raise any new information, it just replies to
 Boris Zbarsky's first reply, which I believe was at some point marked as
 the official reply on the matter:

  http://www.w3.org/mid/20110307162107.GA20019@bowman.infotech.monash.edu.au

 .)

I can't tell from a quick read whether this next message introduces any new
information regarding solutions or not, but it does present evidence that
multiple implementers have misinterpreted the existing text:

  http://www.w3.org/mid/20110307162107.GA20019@bowman.infotech.monash.edu.au


I've also started looking into the problem of why the mail archives are
misbehaving.  I notice that hypermail's archiving of the hypermail mailing list
doesn't display this problem: both backwards and forwards links are present for
navagating among a thread spanning more than one month.  (Whereas in the w3c
archives, the In-reply-to hyperlinks work across month boundaries, but there's
no corresponding link in the other direction.)

I see that a newer version of hypermail is available, and that one of its
changes is related to replies to messages of a different period; though another
of its features might conflict with the w3c patch, since it looks like the new
version implements one of the features that the w3c patch added.  That's about
as far as I've got.  (For some reason, I'm having difficulties applying the
w3c-0.50 patch; though I haven't yet had a look at what's going on there.)

pjrm.
Received on Friday, 3 February 2012 10:26:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:50 GMT