- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 09:04:17 -0600
- To: Christian Roth <roth@visualclick.de>
- CC: www-style Mailing List <www-style@w3.org>
Christian Roth wrote: > All of these were in CSS2, and at least one application (MS > Word) has (though probably limited) support for them. The key number here is "two" as in "two interoperable implementations". The idea of CSS2.1 is to create a spec that actually has implementation support; if there is only one implementation that doth not implementation support make per the CR exit criteria. > Any comments on why they are going to be removed (along with 'orphans' > and 'widows', which do not seem to have any replacement, also)? And which nothing implements. So no one is hurt by them being removed, really.... They will still appear in the relevant CSS3 module, most likely.
Received on Monday, 24 February 2003 10:20:18 UTC