- From: Justin Wood (Callek) <116057@bacon.qcc.mass.edu>
- Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2005 21:55:44 -0500
- To: Ryan Cannon <ryan@ryancannon.com>
- CC: Jesper Tverskov <jesper.tverskov@mail.tele.dk>, www-style@w3.org
The problem as I see it seems to be the inability to easily style the viewport seperately from what is defined in the document, as in would :viewport :root { } /*or*/ :viewport html { } match anything (note the explicit descendant selector there) assuming a :viewport selector. But without me having any clear knowledge on which is true in other circumstances, I defer to the knowledge of Ian and others here. ~Justin Wood Ryan Cannon wrote: > Wouldn't > > html { margin: 0; padding: 0 } > head { display: none } > body {height: 100%; width: 100% } > > Do the trick? It doesn't really make sense for the body element to be > magical, as > > head { display: block } > > is entirely possible, and for some media may be ideal--I'm thinking > here some text-based or small-screen browsers that want to do > something special with title, link and meta elements. > > I think the real problem is that the default stylesheet for the > Mozilla-based browsers includes unnecessary whitespace--which you can > easily work around. > Jesper Tverskov wrote: > >>In my opinion Opera is doing it the way it should be done, and the >>candidate specification is very unclear by the way and could still be >>fixed. W3C's own browser, Amaya 9.0, is also doing it the Opera way. >> >>Only Mozilla/Firefox wants us to both style the html element and the >>body element for the same thing. This is redundant and no fun since the >>DTD doesn't allow the use of the class attribute in the html element. >> >>If we are going with Mozilla/Firefox we need either to include a lot of >>inline styles for the html element which I am never going to do, or to >>have two stylesheets for every document, the last stylesheet just to >>handle the html element, or we need to use the id attribute and find up >>unique values. >> >>We probably need to use the URL of each document for the id value of the >>html element just to please Mozilla/Firefox. This is going to be very >>messy in our external stylesheet. For nothing! I hate it already! >> >>Since all the above "madness" is not necessary to get Opera and W3C's >>Amaya to work, I am counting on IE to help us out the day IE delivers. >>That day I will delete my "being nice to Mozilla/Firefox" rule from my >>stylesheet. >> >>Best regards, >>Jesper Tverskov >> >> >>-----Oprindelig meddelelse----- >>Fra: Ian Hickson [mailto:ian@hixie.ch] >>Sendt: 9. februar 2005 15:01 >>Til: Jesper Tverskov >>Cc: www-html@w3.org; gerald@w3.org >>Emne: Re: XHTML as XML >> >>On Tue, 8 Feb 2005, Jesper Tverskov wrote: >> >> >>>2) Is it a bug for Mozilla/FireFox suddenly to require that we also >>>style the html element with background-color similar to the body >>>element? The Opera browser don't have this problem. In my opinion, the >>> >>> >> >> >> >>>body element must be the "top" element of the view port also when >>> >>> >>XHTML >> >> >>>is XML. >>> >>> >> >>Firefox is correct here. >> >>See the fourth paragraph of >> >> http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/colors.html#q2 >> >>Opera's rendering is a known bug. >> >> >> > > > -- > > Ryan Cannon > Instructional Technology > Web Design > RyanCannon.com <http://ryancannon.com/?refer=email> > (989) 463-7060
Received on Thursday, 10 February 2005 02:56:38 UTC