RE: [css3-namespace] Last call comments from XHTML2 WG

Daniel Glazman wrote:


> Steven Pemberton wrote:
> 
> >     * Because of CSS's versioning mechanism, it is a Bad Thing if rules 
> > change meaning across versions
> 
> Steven, that's the point : CSS has no versions... only levels.
> I have said many times in the past that we now need to get rid
> of levels to move to versions.
> 
> </Daniel>

Steven Pemberton raises a good point in which you have replied about changing CSS from being only by levels into something with versions. Would this allow for progressive enhancement to happen easier?

I replied to Anne van Kesteren last month about the difference between CSS and other languages.

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Feb/0229.html

This is what I think Steven is talking about. CSS has one foot in 1996 and the other foot too eternity where other languages have versions. I have demonstrated recently that there are are ways to achieve progressive enhancement. Even though these selectors were not designed in the first place to lock out browsers, this effectually is what they can be used for. So locking out browsers by unusual use of selectors I believe achieves the net result that versioning of CSS achieves.

Is it possible for all browsers implementers to get together and work out a timeline that particular selectors are supported when other CSS properties are supported (also bugs) by the same browser. This way attributes selector can be used transitionally from now to say 2010 when the whole progressive CSS3 revolution has taken place.

Alan

http://css-class.com/test/

Received on Monday, 31 March 2008 18:55:59 UTC