Re: [CSS21] Make XHTML <body> magic just like HTML <body>

On Thu, 8 Mar 2007, Steven Pemberton wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 21:10:18 +0100, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> > > 
> > > I don't disagree. But why should <body> be non-magic in XHTML when 
> > > it is magic in HTML?
> > 
> > The XHTML2 WG asked for it to be. It really is that simple.
> 
> Actually, it was exactly the other way round. The CSS WG asked the HTML 
> WG for it to be non-magic, and even wrote the text for the spec. See 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-css-wg/1999JulSep/0011.html 
> (member-only link).

Ah. That'll teach me to believe what I'm told. :-) (My statement above was 
based on what I was told after joining the CSSWG in 2000.)

I guess this means that there is no longer anyone who actually wants to 
keep these differences, and we can indeed go ahead with the change.

The wording difference to CSS2.1 would be:

   6.4.4 paragraph 2: change "For HTML" to "For HTML and XHTML".

   11.1.1: Change the sentence "HTML UAs must instead apply the 'overflow' 
   property from the BODY element to the viewport, if the value on the 
   HTML element is 'visible'." to:

      When the root element is an HTML "HTML" element or an XHTML "html" 
      element, and that element has an HTML "BODY" element or an XHTML 
      "body" element as a child, user agents must instead apply the 
      'overflow' property from the first such child element to the 
      viewport, if the value on the root element is 'visible'.

   14.2 paragraph 4: change to:

      For HTML documents, however, we recommend that authors specify the
      background for the BODY element rather than the HTML element. For 
      documents whose root element is an HTML "HTML" element or an XHTML 
      "html" element that has computed values of 'transparent'
      for 'background-color' and 'none' for 'background-image', user 
      agents must instead use the computed value of those properties from 
      that element's first HTML "BODY" element or XHTML "body" element 
      child when painting backgrounds for the canvas, and must not paint a 
      background for that child element. Such backgrounds must also be 
      anchored at the same point as they would be if they were painted 
      only for the root element.

   17.5 paragraph 2: change the last sentence to: "These rules do not 
   apply to HTML or XHTML; HTML imposes its own limitations on row and 
   column spans."

   17.5 final example: This would need various editorial changes to 
   indicate that the second example is not XHTML but some non-HTML XML 
   vocabulary.

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

Received on Friday, 9 March 2007 00:09:00 UTC