- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 18:18:59 +0100
- To: "Andrew S. Townley" <ast@atownley.org>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 20:38:58 +0100, Andrew S. Townley <ast@atownley.org> wrote: > I'm not quite sure I follow what you're saying here. I'm pretty sure > that "#id" and ".class" by default only match the xhtml:id and > xhtml:class attributes. "id" and "class" don't exist in the XHTML namespace. Anyway, any attribute of type ID (see XML specification) can be matched by "#". Furthermore, any attribute of type "class" can influence how "." works. Such as the class attribute in SVG. > If I had something like myvocab:id and > myvocab:class attributes in a content model, I wouldn't expect it to > match, Depends on whether or not myvocab:id is an attribute of type ID. Same for myvocab:class. > unless maybe you can do something with the way the namespaces are > declared in CSS that I didn't see (I need to re-read the namespaces CSS > proposal again, but I don't remember it being there). http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-namespace/ has nothing to do with this. > As far as the proprietary format question, if it's a registered MIME > type like, say Atom or even something else that should be presented to a > user on the Web, it seems to me that that's what CSS was for. Maybe I > misunderstood you. Atom isn't supposed to be read directly (as in, styled with CSS) by end users. That would break on things like type="html" and all that. -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Friday, 29 December 2006 17:19:25 UTC