W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator-css@w3.org > January 2007

Re: Vendor specific extensions

From: David Dorward <david@dorward.me.uk>
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 08:10:11 +0000
To: Joost de Valk <joost@joostdevalk.nl>
Cc: www-validator-css@w3.org
Message-ID: <20070105081011.GB32219@us-lot.org>

On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 09:21:32PM +0100, Joost de Valk wrote:
>    In CSS2.1, vendor specific extensions were
>    formalized: [1]http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/syndata.html#q4, and they
>    have been included in CSS3 as well:
>    [2]http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-syntax/#vendor-specific. However, when
>    parsing the style sheet of one of my websites (css3.info) I find that
>    these vendor specific extensions give errors. 

   A valid CSS 2.1 style sheet must be written according to the
   grammar of CSS 2.1. Furthermore, it must contain only at-rules,
   property names, and property values defined in this specification.

      -- http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/conform.html#valid-style-sheet

The specification defines a mechanism by which vendor specific
extensions won't clash with future standard properties, but it doesn't
define the extensions, and they are not part of CSS 2.1.

>    Is there some way to fix this validation? Or is any such feature
>    planned?

It might be feasible for the validator to distinguish between an
unrecognised property name, and an unrecognised property name that
conforms to the syntax reserved for extensions, but the document would
still be invalid.

-- 
David Dorward                                      http://dorward.me.uk
Received on Friday, 5 January 2007 08:10:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 27 June 2012 00:14:18 GMT