W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator-css@w3.org > December 2006

Re: Bug Report: font-size-adjust

From: olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 22:33:04 +0900
Message-Id: <2468D7B6-BC32-48F3-9A8B-AA8CCDE184D1@w3.org>
Cc: CSS validator list <www-validator-css@w3.org>
To: Jukka K.Korpela <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>

Jukka,

On Dec 18, 2006, at 21:35 , Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> Shouldn't the "CSS Validator" be based on some objective,  
> published, stable criteria, or at least be clearly announced as a  
> lint-type heuristic checker (which contains some rigorousness as  
> well)?

The decision to make CSS2.1 the default profile was taken after  
careful consideration of:

* requests from the CSS WG, including explanations from experts that  
CSS2.1 is closer to what implementations of CSS support than CSS2
* requests from real-world web developers, who have been using CSS2.1  
on a day-to-day basis for a long time, and found it frustrating that  
the old css2 would still be the default
* the will to encourage the adoption of CSS2.1, which will enter  
candidate recommendation phase again very soon)

I have to note that I was at the beginning reluctant to make this  
change, sticking, as you are, to the idea that "css2 is a rec, css21  
is a working draft". After considering arguments from experts in CSS  
and everyday users of the validator, we agreed that changing the  
default was a positive way forward.

> Saying that a group "considers" that their draft "includes errata  
> for CSS2" is false as a descriptive statement (it does not, include  
> the errata, of course) and absurd as a prescriptive or  
> interpretional statement, especially it is means that the CSS 2.1  
> draft has the power of changing the content of the CSS 2.0  
> specification.

For any further discussion on decisions and stance of the CSS WG (on  
CSS21 or anything else), as I told David, and I will reiterate here,  
please take discussion to www-style, which is a list the CSS Working  
Group monitors, while, as far as I can tell, they don't monitor this  
list.

-- 
olivier

[P.S: I will be away for a couple of weeks, and am very unlikely to  
read this list. Others in the qa-dev team will be around, though.]
Received on Monday, 18 December 2006 13:33:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:19:07 UTC