Re: [XHTML 2] renaming :link to :unvisited

Le 28 sept. 06 à 14:29, fantasai a écrit :

>
> David Latapie wrote:
>> “(:link means "unvisited"; and no, I don't know why they didn't  
>> call it that.)”
>> I think Eric Meyer has a point here. Changing it would make it  
>> easier to understand.
>> What do you think of it?
>
> Actually, if we were changing anything, I'd suggest making :link  
> apply to
> both visited and unvisited links; but making any changes at this  
> point would
> break backward-compatibility in a big way. :link and :visited have  
> been in
> CSS since level 1, and have been interoperably implemented in  
> browsers for
> a long time.

Why people keep talking about backward compatibility since XHTML 2.0  
is *not* supposed to backward-compatible?

-- 
</david_latapie>
http://blog.empyree.org/   U+0F00