csswg/css3-conditional Overview.html,1.21,1.22 Overview.src.html,1.21,1.22

Update of /sources/public/csswg/css3-conditional
In directory hutz:/tmp/cvs-serv29862

Modified Files:
	Overview.html Overview.src.html 
Log Message:
Describe issue more clearly.

Index: Overview.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /sources/public/csswg/css3-conditional/Overview.html,v
retrieving revision 1.21
retrieving revision 1.22
diff -u -d -r1.21 -r1.22
--- Overview.html	14 Jun 2011 19:10:02 -0000	1.21
+++ Overview.html	22 Jun 2011 16:57:19 -0000	1.22
@@ -17,13 +17,13 @@
 
    <h1>CSS Conditional Rules Module Level 3</h1>
 
-   <h2 class="no-num no-toc" id=longstatus-date>Editor's Draft 14 June 2011</h2>
+   <h2 class="no-num no-toc" id=longstatus-date>Editor's Draft 22 June 2011</h2>
 
    <dl>
     <dt>This version:
 
-    <dd><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/ED-css3-conditional-20110614/">
-     http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/ED-css3-conditional-20110614</a>
+    <dd><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/ED-css3-conditional-20110622/">
+     http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/ED-css3-conditional-20110622</a>
 
     <dt>Latest version:
 
@@ -939,7 +939,9 @@
   <p>Implementations <strong>must</strong> treat any unknown URL matching
    functions as a syntax error, and thus ignore the &lsquo;<code
    class=css>@document</code>&rsquo; rule. <span class=issue>Should we
-   instead have more complicated error handling rules?</span>
+   instead have more complicated error handling rules to make
+   forward-compatibility work differently, or is this rule the best solution
+   for such future expansion anyway?</span>
 
   <p>This extends the lexical scanner in the <a
    href="http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/grammar.html">Grammar of CSS 2.1</a> (<a

Index: Overview.src.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /sources/public/csswg/css3-conditional/Overview.src.html,v
retrieving revision 1.21
retrieving revision 1.22
diff -u -d -r1.21 -r1.22
--- Overview.src.html	14 Jun 2011 19:10:02 -0000	1.21
+++ Overview.src.html	22 Jun 2011 16:57:19 -0000	1.22
@@ -709,9 +709,10 @@
 </dl>
 
 <p>Implementations <strong>must</strong> treat any unknown URL matching
-functions as a syntax error, and thus ignore the '@document'
-rule.  <span class="issue">Should we instead have more complicated error
-handling rules?</span></p>
+functions as a syntax error, and thus ignore the '@document' rule.
+<span class="issue">Should we instead have more complicated error
+handling rules to make forward-compatibility work differently, or is
+this rule the best solution for such future expansion anyway?</span></p>
 
 <p>This extends the lexical scanner in the
 <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/grammar.html">Grammar of CSS 2.1</a>

Received on Wednesday, 22 June 2011 16:57:27 UTC