- From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 12:49:10 +1100
- To: "Sean Owen" <srowen@google.com>, "Jo Rabin" <jrabin@mtld.mobi>
- Cc: "Dominique Hazael-Massieux" <dom@w3.org>, "Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group WG" <public-bpwg@w3.org>
On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 03:29:49 +1100, Sean Owen <srowen@google.com> wrote: > ISSUE-231 -- need a resolution on this. > > I see that either we conclude... > - that defining exactly how to handle this is tricky enough that it > should be deferred to mobileoK Basic 1.1, as it will be a substantive > change > - that we can easily define whitespace in CSS and can add a > "clarification" that this should be checked at least, though I think > that's pushing it since it is specifically left out now I think that this is a reasonable approach, actually. Effectively whitespace is any actual whitespace, plus any CSS rules that are not applied in "handheld" mode except @media or @import rules. So in the following ==== @media screen { @import url('more.css') foo { property: value } foo { property: value } foo { property: value } foo { property: value } } @media handheld { bar { property: value } bar { property: value } } ==== the four lines of " foo { property: value }" would count as "whitespace", in addition to the actual whitespace. This is a substantive change (most noticeably in the definition of what "whitespace" is - maybe this really crosses a different requirement, but I haven't thought about it it - look for another mail on this later...), but I think an important one. > - leave any change to mobileOK Basic 1.1 as it would be substantive > > I feel like we should to the latter, all things considered. I understand why you feel like that. So, what say the group? cheers Chaals -- Charles McCathieNevile Opera Software, Standards Group je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk http://my.opera.com/chaals Try Opera 9.5: http://snapshot.opera.com
Received on Friday, 25 January 2008 01:49:36 UTC