- From: Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:58:11 -0500
- To: <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>
> > CSS has replied to a comment of ours. Our comment is at > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Sep/0045 > > and the response is at > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Feb/0061 > > > > ACTION to Paul: Check into this. Overview ======== We made three comments on Section 3 of this spec in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Sep/0045 Section 3 of the latest draft is at http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-namespace/#declaration I recommend anyone who is so inclined read this latest version of this section to see if there is anything still requiring our comments. I don't see anything requiring our further comment. Details ======= Our first comment was about the spec saying that namespace prefixes were case insensitive. In the latest draft in section 3.3 it says: Namespace prefixes are, like CSS counter names, case-sensitive. --- Our second comment was that we wanted a normative reference to the Namespace spec. In the latest draft, there is a reference in secton 3.3 to NS 1.0 which is listed under "Normative References". --- Our third comment was: We believe it is essential, and a consequence of XML Namespaces 1.x, that namespace names must never be normalized in any way. The reference to string syntax vs. url() syntax is unclear to us: whichever syntax is permitted, no normalization should be done. We consider this a point that must be clarified in the next draft. In the latest draft, the last sentence of section 3.1 says: A URI string parsed from the URI syntax must be treated as a literal string: as with the STRING syntax, no URI-specific normalization is applied. paul
Received on Friday, 15 February 2008 14:58:29 UTC