Re: Bug - By URI Validation - Value Error : content none is not a content value : none

On Sat, 2009-06-06 at 11:21 +0300, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> Zoffix Znet wrote:
> 
> > If you validate http://stevensfuneralsupplies.com/ you'll see two
> > errors for the print.css file:
> > ( http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=http%3A%2F%
> > 2Fstevensfuneralsupplies.com%2F&warning=2&profile=css3&usermedium=all
> > )
> >
> >  Value Error : content none is not a content value : none
> >
> > The CSS2.1 Specification lists 'none' as a valid value for `content`
> > property: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/generate.html#propdef-content
> 
> But you have requested for "validation" against "CSS3" (which is a 
> collection of sketchy drafts that may change at any moment and should not be 
> cited except as work in progress). That's what the parameter profile=css3 
> means.

Thank you for clarification. The "By URI" link came from our IRC bot,
and I completely forgot that it validates against CSS3. 

Luckly I don't have a pointy-haired boss nor teacher, otherwise I'd be
in trouble with overflow-y being CSS3 :D


> The really funny thing is that the newest draft labeled as belonging to the 
> "CSS3" family lists the value none as permitted for the property content:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-content/#inserting3
> 
> So as far as there can be a bug in a program that checks against something 
> in draft status, here you have one.
> 
> > a[href^="mailto:"]:after { content: none; }
> 
> I wonder whether content: none could be replaced by content: "", but that's 
> a different issue. It would matter, though, if your pointy-haired boss or 
> teacher requires you to present a "clean validation report". :-)
> 
> > And if validated by "Direct Input" does not produce validator errors.
> 
> This, too, depends on the version ("profile") of CSS you "validate" against. 
> The default is "CSS 2.1".
>

Received on Saturday, 6 June 2009 12:17:18 UTC