On Tue, 2008-11-25 at 11:58 +0100, Pallinger Péter wrote: > Frank Lin PIAT írta: > > On Fri, 2008-11-21 at 12:52 +0100, Pallinger Péter wrote: > >> The page is not css-compliant, despite the logo. In particular, > >> -moz-border-radius is > >> not a valid css attribute. > > > > We have this kind of reports from time to time, but that is a false > > negative. > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-www/2007/10/msg00283.html > > > > Quoting Richard Atterer: > > The validator is wrong, the property "-moz-border-radius" is permitted > > by the spec: > > <http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-css3-syntax-20030813/#vendor-specific> > > Maybe the validator classifies it as an error because the use of vendor > > extensions is discouraged. > > Actually, this is not a false negative. > > According to W3C: > "The specification defines a mechanism by which vendor specific > extensions won't clash with future standard properties, but it doesn't > define the extensions, and they are not part of CSS 2.1."
You are not quoting W3C, but a post on a mailing list, so I won't comment it. > And: > "A valid CSS 2.1 style sheet must be written according to the > grammar of CSS 2.1. Furthermore, it must contain only at-rules, > property names, and property values defined in this specification" The above paragraph is really weird, as it conflict with the "-moz-foo" vendor extension (the CSS 3.0 drafts seems to have dropped that paragraph actually). Anyway, the CSS specification explicitly allow "-vendor-foo" for vendor-specific *extensions*. It does explain how a conforming user agent should handle it (i.e ignore it by default). > So, these extensions are not "permitted" by the spec Wrong, they are permitted. The specs states "Authors should avoid vendor-specific extensions" > only recommended to be used by vendors for experimentation (and adhere > to the grammar rules). And this does not make them valid. Yep. BTW, a CSS2 stylesheet isn't valid for a CSS1 conforming user-agent (and so on). > It is somewhat confusing for me, too, but this seems to be a consistent view > of W3C > guys, so using '-moz-border-radius' really makes a stylesheet not valid > CSS2.1 or CSS3. Well... so it isn't part of the specs, but it is allowed by the specs. This is a vendor *extension* that "Authors should avoid". I am pretty sure that the author of the stylesheet was aware of it, and he/she decided to "experiment" that feature (assuming the extension would be adopted in CSS3??) You are welcome to provide some patch that implements a similar feature in a portable and standards conforming way. Thanks, Franklin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
