Re: XHTML as XML

On Thu, 10 Feb 2005, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> > 
> > Actually at the moment there are no outstanding proposals for @canvas; 
> > all the use cases have been handled by special-casing the root 
> > element. (In particular, background on the root element, and 
> > 'overflow' on the root element to do scrollbars.)
> 
> So CSS 2.1 is changed again for XML documents? Is it going back to WD? 

(CSS2.1 will very likely be going through last call again because we have 
fixed a lot of problems that were raised in the last few months since 
getting to CR.)


> Because currently it reads:
>
> # HTML UAs may apply the overflow property from the BODY or HTML
> # elements to the viewport.

We will be replacing that with:

# UAs may apply the 'overflow' property set on the root element to
# the viewport (instead of the root element). HTML UAs may also apply
# the 'overflow' property from the BODY element to the viewport.

(That was post-CR issue 50.)


> CSS 3 does not mention any of this.

We haven't updated the CSS3 drafts since discussing this. In general, 
always refer to the latest dated spec, not the spec with the highest 
version number (although in this case it wouldn't help either!).


> To be clear, this testcase is now INVALID:
> 
>  <http://annevankesteren.nl/test/css/p/overflow/xhtml-html.xml>
> 
> ...?

Well, it's always been invalid HTML. :-)

Gecko renders that test correctly. There are no explicit pass criteria in 
that test but assuming you expected no red to appear, then it is indeed 
wrong.

Cheers,
-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Thursday, 10 February 2005 14:39:33 UTC