- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2010 08:39:42 -0700
- To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- CC: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, "www-style@w3.org list" <www-style@w3.org>, "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>
On 7/7/10 8:18 AM, Chris Lilley wrote: > Agree about the loophole, not desirable (but hard to normatively link to all future CSS specs, too. Besides, CSS might in future define some properties with optional units). > > The easy fix being s/CSS2 [CSS2]/CSS/ ? or some other fix? It seems to me that saying that properties defined by SVG but not CSS have optional units while properties defined by CSS use whatever the CSS syntax is (without referencing a particular version of CSS) would be future proof in the relevant ways... as long as there are no future name collisions, which is something I think we all agree would be bad. -Boris
Received on Wednesday, 7 July 2010 15:40:17 UTC