- From: Justin Rogers <justrog@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 19:53:01 -0700
- To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Supporting such a feature in CSS 3 won't be a problem. The consideration here is how a CSS 2.1 standards compliant parsing engine should treat the rule given the current wording of the specification. I would still desire some clarification that would trump the current behavior of Opera and IE 8. When considering a pure CSS 2.1 parsing context. If at-rules are invalid, but parse-able then a text clarification should be added to the specification and both Opera and IE 8 would have to take changes to support such behavior. Justin Rogers [MSFT] -----Original Message----- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann [mailto:derhoermi@gmx.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 9:04 AM To: Justin Rogers Cc: www-style@w3.org Subject: Re: [CSS2.1] Grammar for @media versus general block parsing * Justin Rogers wrote: >So the question is, should the grammar in this case be read strictly >since it clearly points out a semantic for the @media block, and thus >only allow rule-sets making the Opera/IE 8 behavior correct? Or should >the parsers allow any statement within the block including the at-rule? CSS Level 3 allows using e.g. @page as child of @media, so you will end up implementing the latter behavior either way. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
Received on Wednesday, 25 June 2008 02:53:46 UTC