Re: CSS WG comments on SVG 1.2

"Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch> wrote in message 
news:Pine.LNX.4.61.0411291015080.24069@dhalsim.dreamhost.com...
>
> On Mon, 29 Nov 2004, Antoine Quint wrote:
>> Although you are probably aware, the reason for this type of issue is
>> that CSS doesn't offer any way to "package" property names and ensure
>> avoiding clashes with other vocabularies.
>
> Prefixing every property with "svg-" would do that.
>
> However, since the properties are cascaded for every single element in the
> tree, regardless of namespace, a property only applying to one namespace
> should be a warning sign anyway, which is one reason that the CSS working
> group hasn't introduced a mechanism to do what you describe.

Reading this, I come to the conclusion that mark-up specific CSS properties 
are a problem, CSS should only apply to all mark-up languages or none?  and 
no naming strategy will solve this?

> Personally, for many of the above properties I think that would be much
> better. For example, the 'focusable' property doesn't seem like something
> you'd want to change from a stylesheet.

I agree, not having these as CSS properties would be an excellent idea. 
Unfortunately there is then a consistency problem with some properties as 
both properties and some as CSS, how would you suggest resolving this? As I 
do not think that is appropriate.

Cheers,

Jim.

Received on Monday, 29 November 2004 11:10:52 UTC