- 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