- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 22:54:06 +0100
- To: www-style@w3.org
On Sunday, January 5, 2003, 7:14:34 PM, Shelby wrote: SM> At 04:21 PM 1/5/2003 +0100, Chris Lilley wrote: >>DH> This seems to be the crucial point. Does XBL have any more impact on >>DH> semantics than CSS already does? >> >>No, it doesn't. SM> Wrong. Because CSS states that its non-conforming portions are optional for SM> conforming UAs. CSS has some limp blanket clauses as a sop to HTML implementors, true. (Hopefully CSS2.1 will remove those). I don't see what that has to do with presentation defining or not defining semantics. SM> http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/visuren.html#display-prop SM> "Conforming HTML user agents may ignore the 'display' property." Yes (which is a bad idea) but your point would only be backed up if it had said "conforming HTML user agents must ignore the display property because that is the HTML semantic and we don't want to step on their toes". -- Chris mailto:chris@w3.org
Received on Sunday, 5 January 2003 16:54:03 UTC