W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator-css@w3.org > September 2012

Re: CSS3 Validation Service - @keyframes and animation

From: Jukka K. Korpela <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 12:05:29 +0300
Message-ID: <50505059.6060705@cs.tut.fi>
To: Jasdeep Khalsa <jasdeep@sikher.com>
CC: www-validator-css@w3.org
2012-09-09 11:05, Jasdeep Khalsa wrote:

> I have been trying to check the conformity of some CSS3 stylesheets and
> I believe the W3C CSS validator must be a little out of date since using
> valid mark-up for the CSS3 animation property returns "Property
> animation doesn't exist"

There is really no CSS3. There is a collection of documents of varying 
maturity, collectively called CSS3. Everyone and his brother has a 
little different idea of what documents are included. One view is that 
CSS3 documents are those listed at
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/current-work.en.html
But regarding the validator, many documents there are so incomplete 
drafts, or marked as "abandoned", "dangerously outdated", or otherwise 
questionable for the purposes of validation.

One idea that I read somewhere is that only documents with CR level or 
higher should be included. Yet, the validator recognizes many properties 
defined in WD level documents only. But not all of them.

The only documentation about the properties actually recognized by the 
validator in its default mode, CSS3, appears to be in the changelogs: by 
visiting
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/css-validator/org/w3c/css/properties/CSS3Properties.properties
and "downloading" (i.e., opening) the newest revision one can see the 
list of properties.

> even though it is implemented in Firefox 5+,
> Chrome, Safari and Opera with -moz-, -webkit-, -webkit- and -o- prefixed
> respectively.

The W3C CSS Validator checks against W3C documents called 
"specifications", not against implementations. How the "specifications" 
relate to implementations is a different issue.

> My point of reference has been the W3C Schools website:

It's unsuitable as reference, learning material, and other purposes. And 
not just because it intentionally misrepresents itself in a manner that 
suggests some affiliation with the W3C. See http://w3fools.com.

Yucca
Received on Wednesday, 12 September 2012 09:06:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 12 September 2012 09:06:12 GMT