- From: gordon <gordon@quartz.gly.fsu.edu>
- Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1999 20:19:02 -0700
- To: "'www-style'" <www-style@w3.org>
I tried adding a style element to a test page [XHTML transitional]. The W3C validator was not happy. I would suggest that something is fundamentally wrong when specifications are issued which result in invalid documents. later, gordon ----- Original Message ----- From: Braden N. McDaniel <braden@shadow.net> To: Chris Wilson <cwilso@MICROSOFT.com>; 'www-style' <www-style@w3.org> Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 1999 7:31 PM Subject: Re: Minor error in CSS2, section 14.2; 'background' > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Chris Wilson <cwilso@MICROSOFT.com> > To: 'www-style' <www-style@w3.org> > Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 1999 9:37 PM > Subject: RE: Minor error in CSS2, section 14.2; 'background' > > > > I see. Changes introduced in CSS2 win again. > > No, this is consistent with CSS1; CSS2 just spells it out a little more > clearly. 4.5 of CSS1 includes the rule > > "If the 'background' value of the 'HTML' element is different from > 'transparent' then use it, else use the 'background' value of the 'BODY' > element. If the resulting value is 'transparent', the rendering is > undefined." > > The intent of this is clarified in the example that follows: > > "This rule allows: > > <HTML STYLE="background: url(http://style.com/marble.png)"> > <BODY STYLE="background: red"> > > In the example above, the canvas will be covered with "marble". The > background of the 'BODY' element (which may or may not fully cover the > canvas) will be red." > > > I'd like to see this reconciled with the background attributes on body - > If > > HTML is the root display node, then according to CSS the BODY must only be > > as large as its content (unless width/height are explicitly given), and > the > > BACKGROUND/BGCOLOR would only be shown under the actual content. > > Right. In what way do the rules in 4.5 of CSS1 and 14.2 of CSS2 not achieve > the reconciliation you're looking for? > > > Not to mention, of course, the other proprietary mechanisms introduced o n > > BODY long before CSS2. > > It seems to me these rules could be extended to cover those extensions, too; > though perhaps I'm overlooking something. > > -- > Braden N. McDaniel > braden@endoframe.com > <URL:http://www.endoframe.com> > > >
Received on Wednesday, 8 September 1999 23:19:12 UTC