On Sun, 27 May 2007 09:10:47 +0100, David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com> wrote: >> Making <style scoped> apply to nodes that follow the parent of <style >> scoped> in document order traversal seems counter-intuitive from the >> point of view of authoring documents. For authoring intuitiveness, >> limiting the scope to the subtree rooted at the parent of <style >> scoped> makes more sense. >> > > I see what you mean. However, I still don't think <style scoped> should > apply to any prior content. Ideally scoped would be defined in such a > way that no re-resolution has to occur as you do a forward parse of the > document. What about the intersection of the two approaches? Limiting > the scope only to following siblings of <style> (and their descendants)? Maybe <style scoped> should be allowed only as a first child of its parent then? -- regards, Kornel LesinskiReceived on Sunday, 27 May 2007 19:40:55 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:21 UTC