Re: CSS WG comments on SVG 1.2

I would second Antoine's comment, and see it as a problem that's coming 
up more and more often as the CSS vocabularies expand. These are also 
likely to collide with areas such as XUL (consider that XUL has a 
tooltip attribute, and an overlay element).

A separate comment on /static/, for both WGs. Please note that the CSS 
property /float/ requires a number of workarounds in most languages, as 
/float/ is also a data type keyword that many Javascript interpreters 
pick up on, creating sometimes extraordinarily difficult errors to 
catch. The property /static/ likewise has this potential, as it is used 
in languages such as C++ to determine the scope and behavior of 
variables. I'd recommend changing this property name to something that 
would likely not provide such a wide range of collissions.

-- Kurt Cagle



Antoine Quint wrote:

> Hello Bert and the CSS WG,
>
> On 28 nov. 04, at 23:45, Bert Bos wrote:
>
>> 6) PROPERTIES WITH DANGEROUSLY GENERIC NAMES
>>
>> Several properties in SVG 1.2 (including 'enable-background',
>> 'overlay', 'cache', 'static', 'snap', 'focusable', 'tooltip') have
>> names that are likely to clash with future CSS extensions. Since the
>> SVG-introduced properties apply only to specific SVG cases, whereas
>> the CSS properties are generic, we request that the SVG property names
>> be made more specific to avoid future clashes.
>
>
> Although you are probably aware, the reason for this type of issue is 
> that CSS doesn't offer any way to "package" property names and ensure 
> avoiding clashes with other vocabularies. One way to solve the CSS WG 
> issue is that these new attributes could remain XML attributes and not 
> be made available too via CSS mechanisms. That is my preferred 
> solution as renaming properties would complexify usage by SVG authors.
>
> Antoine