- From: Robert Koberg <rob@koberg.com>
- Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 16:21:10 -0700
- To: "'Boris Zbarsky'" <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Cc: "'Ian Hickson'" <ian@hixie.ch>, <www-style@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: Boris Zbarsky [mailto:bzbarsky@MIT.EDU] > Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2003 4:03 PM > To: Robert Koberg > Cc: 'Ian Hickson'; www-style@w3.org > > > > Robert Koberg wrote: > >>>This rules out the colon character which is widely used in XML names. > > > > What percentage of real users have these kind of browsers? > > What percentage of users have browsers that support styling XML via CSS > at all? (Styling tag soup via CSS and pretending it's XML doesn't > count, since there are no namespaces involved in tag soup.) Well, this: <html> <head> <style> c:\article {margin:3%} c:\section {margin:3%} </style> </head> <body> <c:article id="abc" xmlns:c="someuri"> <c:section>boo</c:section> </c:article> </body> <html> Do you consider it XML being styled by CSS (you need the namespace, btw)? I suppose not by your definition. However, with the nonstandard browser I am using, I can validate it with a standard XML Schema. I don't know, but 80% percent of the users out that can use this. There are a few things that are not in the standards, like contentEditable, which seems to have been in the original intention of the web. > Of the ones > that do, the vast majority have browsers that support the draft > specification in question. Of the ones that do... > > -Boris
Received on Sunday, 19 October 2003 19:23:11 UTC