- 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