- From: Garth Wallace <gwalla@sfgate.com>
- Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1999 10:57:03 -0700
- To: www-style@w3.org
Why? That's like saying that Lisp should conform to C syntax. > -----Original Message----- > From: www-style-request@w3.org [SMTP:www-style-request@w3.org] > Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 1999 2:42 PM > To: www-style@w3.org > Subject: Re: New WD: CSS3 selectors > > In article <14248.30734.450097.535320@www43.inria.fr>, Bert Bos > <Bert.Bos@sophia.inria.fr> writes > >A new working draft was just published: > > > > CSS3 module: W3C selectors > > http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/WD-CSS3-selectors-19990803 > > The new draft uses a lot of blah-de-blah pseudo classes and suchlike. > Today I also had a glance at the new SMIL draft, which specifically > talks about replacing such things with a blahDeBlah kind of arrangement. > Wouldn't it be better to be consistent across all the various > technologies? > > If that makes any sense at all. > > -- > George Lund
Received on Thursday, 5 August 1999 14:02:55 UTC