- From: Laurens Holst <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl>
- Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 16:33:04 +0200
- To: Ben Ward <ben@ben-ward.co.uk>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
- Message-ID: <44746EA0.1020001@students.cs.uu.nl>
Ben Ward schreef: > HeroreV wrote: > > One common problem of CSS that is likely to become > > worse: When something new is introduced, there is no > > easy way to give styling that uses it only to UAs that > > support it, and use older methods for UAs that do not. > > > > This concept has been done a few times before and rejected. I'd > recommended searching the archives for "!required", which was designed > to achieved much the same thing. > > Off the top of my head, it fell down on a number of issues, one of > which centred around the requirement for user agents to implement it > correctly and be honest about which CSS features they support. > Furthermore, the concept of supporting a particular CSS feature does > not indicate whether the feature is supported _accurately_, without > bugs. As such, the value of features like this has been shown to > evaporate quite quickly and it all comes out looking a bit too Utopian > to work in practice. On the other hand, there is a mechanism in CSS of dropping unrecognised declarations. What if the naming was changed to stop suggesting the ‘support’ of a feature (something that marketing may be sensitive to), and instead simply allow to query whether a certain declaration was dropped? So @declaration-dropped, or something? That should be simple enough to query, and would allow for one dropped declaration to cause larger amounts of declarations to be dropped. ~Grauw -- Ushiko-san! Kimi wa doushite, Ushiko-san nan da!! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Laurens Holst, student, university of Utrecht, the Netherlands. Website: www.grauw.nl. Backbase employee; www.backbase.com.
Received on Wednesday, 24 May 2006 14:33:11 UTC