Re: New WD: CSS3 selectors

• From: George Lund <George@lundboox.demon.co.uk>
• Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1999 18:01:43 +0100
• To: www-style@w3.org
• Message-ID: <0kMCTiA3fbr3IAAI@lundboox.demon.co.uk>

In article <7E36FB0187D9D211B6710060979380A2BF91BA@caen.sfchron.com>,
Garth Wallace <gwalla@sfgate.com> writes

[rearranged according to usual custom]

>> >    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?

>Why? That's like saying that Lisp should conform to C syntax.

Well perhaps that should be taken as a comment on the changes to the
SMIL syntax, rather than my plea for consistency.

-- 
George Lund

Received on Sunday, 8 August 1999 13:03:06 UTC