- From: 张金龙 <jinlongz@oupeng.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 12:09:53 +0800
- To: "Sylvain Galineau" <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <2012092612095248509110@oupeng.com>
Hi all~ I'm exciting to hear that the Conditional spec <http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-conditional/> is basically finished. Now I need to update changes to my translational wiki page <http://www.w3.org/html/ig/zh/wiki/Css3-conditional>. My wiki page is base on Editor's Draft 31 July 2012. Whether it has changelog? Thanks. Zhang Jinlong --- Web Specialist skype : jinlong3546 QQ : 237585693 Weibo : http://weibo.com/newwave From: Sylvain Galineau Date: 2012-09-25 23:13 To: Tab Atkins Jr.; www-style list Subject: RE: [css3-conditional] Resolving issues [Tab Atkins Jr.:] > > The Conditional spec <http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-conditional/> is > basically finished. It's only got a handful of issues preventing it from > advancing: > > Issue 1, using the new conditions with @import. We propose pushing this > to level 4. It's not high-priority, so there's no reason to delay the > rest of the spec, or rush its development. Agree. > > Issue 2, the "font_face_rule" production is not defined by Fonts. We > propose just fixing Fonts, and removing this issue. ^_^ Seems reasonable. > > Issue 3, forward compatible parsing of @supports. We believe the forward- > compatible parsing is sufficient here. Testing selectors and whatnot can > be easily done in a way that is invalid per the current grammar. I recall we talked about this in San Diego though I'm not sure we reached a conclusion? I'd like to hear more about this one. > Issue 4, adding an example with !important, can be trivially done. > I'll pick that up tomorrow - it takes all of ten minutes. > > The remaining issues are all regarding @document, and are substantially > harder. We propose pushing @document to level 4, so the rest of the spec > can advance quickly, since we already have several implementors wanting to > release the other features. I agree with this. > > Are our suggested fixes acceptable? Are there any other issues that > aren't yet marked in the draft? If the answers are yes and no, > respectively, we'll fix them and request a new WD this week or next. > > ~TJ and fantasai >
Attachments
- image/jpeg attachment: 18327_head-foot.jpg
Received on Wednesday, 26 September 2012 04:10:28 UTC