Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-xmlgraphics-batik-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 86188 invoked from network); 12 Oct 2005 14:20:24 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 12 Oct 2005 14:20:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 9226 invoked by uid 500); 12 Oct 2005 14:20:19 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-xmlgraphics-batik-dev-archive@xmlgraphics.apache.org Received: (qmail 9218 invoked by uid 500); 12 Oct 2005 14:20:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact batik-dev-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: batik-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list batik-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org Received: (qmail 9207 invoked by uid 99); 12 Oct 2005 14:20:18 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 12 Oct 2005 07:20:18 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.6 required=10.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME,SPF_PASS,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of thomas.deweese@kodak.com designates 192.232.121.200 as permitted sender) Received: from [192.232.121.200] (HELO smtp1.kodak.com) (192.232.121.200) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 12 Oct 2005 07:20:19 -0700 Received: from roc-us-e1000-111.kodak.com (roc-us-e1000-111.kodak.com [192.232.121.191]) by smtp1.kodak.com (8.11.3/8.11.1) with SMTP id j9CEJtn22366 for ; Wed, 12 Oct 2005 10:19:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from (150.221.122.53) by roc-us-e1000-111.kodak.com via smtp id 7813_42bf3b30_3b2b_11da_9560_0002b3efa0be; Wed, 12 Oct 2005 10:19:54 -0400 In-Reply-To: <434D13F1.6090208@expway.fr> To: batik-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org Cc: batik-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org Subject: Re: Custom elements and the "style" attribute MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.4 March 27, 2005 Message-ID: From: thomas.deweese@kodak.com Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 10:19:51 -0400 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on KNOTES2/ISBP/EKC(Release 6.5.4FP1|June 19, 2005) at 10/12/2005 10:19:55 AM, Serialize complete at 10/12/2005 10:19:55 AM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Hi Robin, Either you take my interpretation of the two specs. I.E. CSS2 says that a U/A must ignore unknown properties when parsing and hence there are no unknown properties for the words in CSSStyleDeclaration to apply to. Alternately you must agree that the language in the two specs is fundamentally incompatible. We can not both present and ignore the property at the same time. I would rather think that the CSSStyleDeclaration is making a useless statement rather than directly violating the language of the spec it is building on. Also since this is the interface returned by the 'style' member of SVGStylable it does effect individual elements (I suspect the situation is similar in XHTML land as well). I don't think any action can be taken on this issue until the CSS/DOM WG clarifies the situation. Robin Berjon wrote on 10/12/2005 09:47:29 AM: > Hi Thomas, all, > > thomas.deweese@kodak.com wrote: > > Robin Berjon wrote: > >>>However at the level of the DOM, this isn't needed. It's the same thing > >>>as "ignoring" elements in a namespace you don't know -- you still put > >>>them in the DOM. > > > > This is a very poor analogy. The DOM needs to know nothing about > > attributes to behave correctly an attribute is just an attribute and > > it has DOMString as it's value. This is not at all the case for CSS > > properties, they are complex typed entites, with complex rules about > > inheritance and default values. > > You may not like my analogy, but it nevertheless is the conformant > behaviour required by the CSSStyleDeclaration interface of DOM 2 Style > for CSS. It's specified in no uncertain terms: > > """ > While an implementation may not recognize all CSS properties within a > CSS declaration block, it is expected to provide access to all specified > properties in the style sheet through the CSSStyleDeclaration interface. > Furthermore, implementations that support a specific level of CSS should > correctly handle CSS shorthand properties for that level. For a further > discussion of shorthand properties, see the CSS2Properties interface. > """ > > Yes, implementations that know some properties will behave different > from implementation that don't. That's specified normatively. Note that > the situation is exactly the same in the approach you advocate: > implementations behave differently depending on what they know. At least > with the standard behaviour you get the information and can try to > handle the situation, whereas if you delete the properties then all is lost. > > Note that this is at the CSS declaration level, which is separate from > the elements level. Still, letting the end user decide which information > is pertinent to her is a sounder approach. Yes you can't inherit and you > can't compute, but at least you let someone who knows the problem > they're trying to solve much better than you do decide how to best > handle the situation. > > -- > Robin Berjon > Senior Research Scientist > Expway, http://expway.com/ > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: batik-dev-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: batik-dev-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: batik-dev-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: batik-dev-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org