- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2008 18:25:32 +0200
- To: "Arron Eicholz" <Arron.Eicholz@microsoft.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Cc: "Robert Stam" <robert@tallcomponents.com>, "public-css-testsuite@w3.org" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
On Fri, 04 Apr 2008 17:55:59 +0200, Arron Eicholz
<Arron.Eicholz@microsoft.com> wrote:
> I agree that cases should validate but there are some exceptions. When
> the case is flagged HTMLonly it doesn't necessarily have to validate as
> XHTML does it? Those cases might not validate for XHTML. There could be
> all sorts of deprecated attributes and tags in there that might not
> allow XHTML to validate but would be perfectly fine in HTML.
HTML and XHTML share the same vocabulary, so I don't think that's true.
> Chapter_4\bad-selector.htm: Corrected with a CDATA
> Chapter_4\invalid-decl-at-rule-001.htm: corrected with CDATA
> Chapter_4\escaped-ident-001.htm: Corrected to use dash and underscore
> Chapter_4\escaped-ident-spaces-001.htm: corrected to use dash and
> underscore
> Chapter_16\white-space-009.htm: attribute corrected to be valid HTML but
> case is flagged as HTMLonly.
>
> Side question... If an 'id' is invalid (i.e. "B&W?") should you still be
> able to match the invalid 'id' using CSS? 'id' attributes can't contain
> '&' or '?' so I am thinking there should be no way to match in this case
> since the 'id' is invalid but I'm want to confirm this.
Yes, you should still be able to do that. Though you may need to use
character escapes because you can not use all characters directly in CSS.
(Just like you can still do document.getElementById("B&W?") for such
elements.)
--
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Friday, 4 April 2008 16:26:15 UTC