RE: FW: Taking Associating Stylesheets Second Edition to PER [was: Agenda for XML Core WG telcon of 2010 June 30]

My opinion is that the AssocSS spec is about how to associate
a stylesheet with an XML document.  It is not supposed to be
about what certain parameters mean to certain UAs that might
be associating a SS written in a certain language with the XML.

It's beyond me why this spec should talk about what "media"
means, and I see that Tim (and Liam) are still talking about
browsers as if they are the only thing that use stylesheets,
so I still don't think we are on the same wavelength, and I'm
beginning to think we never will be.

If browser vendors want to decide among themselves what "media"
means to CSS-using browsers, that's fine with me, as long as 
they don't decide what it means in the non-CSS case or the
non-browser case and as long as they don't try to shoehorn
it into the AssocSS spec.

paul

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Liam R E Quin [mailto:liam@w3.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, 2010 July 06 13:08
> To: Simon Pieters
> Cc: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org; Grosso, Paul
> Subject: Re: FW: Taking Associating Stylesheets Second Edition to PER
> [was: Agenda for XML Core WG telcon of 2010 June 30]
> 
> On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 19:41 +0200, Simon Pieters wrote:
> [...]
> > > I met with Tim this morning; he'd like
> > >
> > > Add to the document, e.g. in the Applications para
> > > At the time of edition 1 (1999) the meaning of these p-attributes
> was
> > > not well specified,
> >
> > Appendix B already states:
> >
> > "The first edition of this specification was admirably brief, but at
> the
> > same time left many details unstated."
> 
> Maybe it needs to be up higher :(
> 
> 
> > > and at the time of edition 2 (2010) there is low
> > > interoperability in the values between implementations;
> >
> > How do we assess that there is low interoperability in the values
> between
> > implementations?
> [...]
> 
> I don't have a way to assess interop because the spec is too vague.
> There were claims made in our PER director's call that different
> implementations do different things with a missing "media"
> pseudo-attribute, although I'm not entirely sure that really means
> low interop, because e.g. a Web browser isn't going to do anything
> useful with a link to a FOSI stylesheet.
> 
> > > We need also to contact browser vendors and see if they are
willing
> > > to sit round a table & get conformance/semantics pinned down in a
> > > future edition.
> >
> > Hmm. I work for a browser vendor. I joined this group in the hope to
> get
> > conformance/semantics pinned down. But the WG consensus was to not
> have
> > any conformance requirements at all.
> 
> Right (well, I wasn't on the WG at that time but watched from
> outside..)
> 
> I think Tim is agreeing with you, but also accepting the WG position
> that this is an edited rec, not a whole new version.
> 
> 
> --
> Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
> Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/
> Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org www.advogato.org

Received on Tuesday, 6 July 2010 18:18:13 UTC