W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-testsuite@w3.org > September 2009

Re: [CSSWG] Release Candidate for CSS Namespaces Test Suite

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 18:58:02 +0200
Message-ID: <4AC23C9A.8020106@xn--mlform-iua.no>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
CC: public-css-testsuite@w3.org
Anne van Kesteren On 09-09-29 16.18:

> On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 16:03:06 +0200, Leif Halvard Silli :
>> I just argued, in a reply to √ėyvind, that it is. It would be nice to  
>> know exactly why it is not an error - if it isn't one.
> It is not an error per the grammar or the prose of Selectors. Such rules  
> need to be rejected.

See the other "subthread".

>>>  This has nothing to do with the @namespace construct.
>> If you want *.class{} to select an element inside a SVG file - or  
>> section, then it is useful to have a test that shows that
>>     svgNamespaceLinkedPrefix|*.class{}
>> works, no?
> Ah, I thought you meant something else. I suppose we could add that, yes.

I guess I changed my goal during the discussion ...

>>>> 5. The XMLNS namespace, is it necessary to declare it?
>>>  Yes. There's nothing in the CSS namespaces draft that suggests it is   
>>> special. CSS namespaces are independent of XML namespaces.
>> Ok. Do you then agree that tests that catches the error which Firefox is  
>> currently having, is needed?
> Sure, if you contribute one.


>>>> 6. The XML namespace, is it necessary to declare it via @namespace?
>>>  Yes.
>> Same note as above: do you agree that tests that catches the Firefox  
>> error is needed?
> Sure.


>>>> 9. text/html namespace tests!
>>>  Since HTML5 is far away and it is not strictly needed I'd rather  
>>> avoid  testing this for now and assume it will work down the road given  
>>> that the  DOM model is identical.
>> Well, I would argue the opposite - and I would not mix HTML 5 into the  
>> issue at all (even if I perhaps did ...):
>>    * In order to prove that CSS @namespace is completely unrelated to  
>> the namespaces of the host language, it would be useful to have tests  
>> for text/html. Text/html is here today.
>>    * Also, I guess one may already link the same CSS file to both XHTML  
>> and HTML - and SVG etc - files. So it is already relevant.
>> It is also very simple: The two tests pages I made are identical (except  
>> for one line of info in the start) - they are just served differently.   
>> I guess you don't say no thanks, if I offer them ...
> Since the requirements of namespaces in the HTML DOM are changing between  
> HTML4 and HTML5 and user agents are somewhere in middle collectively it  
> seems unwise to test this until the new approach is fully done. The new  
> approach happens to be named HTML5.

For tests which only seek to see whether selector sequences are 
considered valid by the UA - independently of the host language, I 
cannot see that HTML 5 matters.

However, I agree that testing whether a "namespaced selector 
sequence" actually matches anything inside a text/html document, 
should not start, yet.
leif halvard silli
Received on Tuesday, 29 September 2009 16:58:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 20 January 2023 19:58:14 UTC