W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > July 2004

[whatwg] some issues

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 15:47:50 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0407151541380.2881@dhalsim.dreamhost.com>
On Sat, 10 Jul 2004, Jim Ley wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 18:58:08 +0000 (UTC), Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:
>> CSS extensions won't be done via WHATWG
>> (although I'm sure we'll be proposing plenty of extensions originally
>> conceived of in this list, in the W3C CSS working group).
> So, as has been proposed, things like specific CSS properties for
> styling date pickers, will be raised in the W3C CSS WG ?

I don't know the details of what will be proposed yet, obviously.

>> Also, Web Forms 2 doesn't change HTML, it merely extends it
> So there'll be no changes to the SGML declaration, and we'll still get
> to use SHORTTAG and stuff?

I have no intention of going near the SGML declaration. Maybe fantasai has
more specific thoughts on the matter, though. Fantasai?

> However, your argument about changing XHTML also falls down, in that
> it's XHTML which requires complete failure and no rendering in response
> to XML WF's errors - since SVG recovers much more gracefully from XML WF
> errors.

You have this backwards. I refer you to XHTML 1.0 section 3.2, and SVG 1.1
section F.2.

> So you wouldn't be changing XML, just XHTML, something you're already
> doing.

This is also incorrect, I refer you to XML 1.1 section 5.1.

Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 15 July 2004 08:47:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:35 UTC