- From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 15:51:40 +0900
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
Le 7 févr. 2008 à 08:11, fantasai a écrit :
> karl@w3.org wrote:
>> Hi, This is a QA Review comment for "CSS Module: Namespaces" http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-css3-namespace-20060828/
>> 2006-08-28 2nd WD
>> About http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-css3-namespace-20060828/#css-
>> qnames
>> [[[ CSS qualified names can be used in (for example) selectors and
>> property values as described
>> in other modules. Those modules should define the use of a
>> namespace prefix that has not been
>> properly declared as a parsing error that will cause the selector
>> or declaration (etc.) to be
>> considered invalid and ignored. ]]] Why a "SHOULD" here? Let's
>> imagine that two modules define
>> two contradictory behavior for handling namespaces not "properly
>> declared". It will be lead to
>> difficulties in implementations if not total incompatibilities. The
>> modules should not define
>> anything and rely on the rules defined in this module.
>> What should do an authoring tool? It seems in this case that it
>> should not ignore at all the
>> error and pop up a message to fix it. The spec must define the
>> class of products and apply
>> requirements depending on the products.
>
> Clarified as
>
> CSS qualified names can be used in (for example) selectors and
> property
> values as described in other modules. Those modules must define
> handling
> of namespace prefixes that have not been properly declared. Such
> handling
> should treat undeclared namespace prefixes as a parsing error
> that will
> cause the selector or declaration (etc.) to be considered invalid
> and, in
> CSS, ignored.
>
> where "ignored" is linked to the CSS2.1 definition. ("ignored" has a
> very specific
> meaning in CSS parsing. Reporting an error is fine.)
satisfied.
Thanks
--
Karl Dubost - W3C
http://www.w3.org/QA/
Be Strict To Be Cool
Received on Thursday, 7 February 2008 06:51:52 UTC