On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 15:01:27 +0200, L. David Baron dba...@dbaron.org
wrote:
On Wednesday 2010-08-25 10:28 +0200, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
We need a feature for case-insensitive matching in Selectors already
for XHTML (if we really care about this, not sure we do).
Allowing case-insensitive
On Monday 2010-08-30 14:28 +0200, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 15:01:27 +0200, L. David Baron
dba...@dbaron.org wrote:
On Wednesday 2010-08-25 10:28 +0200, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
We need a feature for case-insensitive matching in Selectors already
for XHTML (if we really
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 14:35:03 +0200, L. David Baron dba...@dbaron.org
wrote:
But the problem with adding a new general selectors feature is that
authors will discover it and try to use it for things that aren't ok
being ASCII-only.
Yeah, maybe. But we could define it as some kind of token
On Wednesday 2010-08-25 10:28 +0200, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, 25 Aug 2010 09:44:34 +0200, Christoph Päper
christoph.pae...@crissov.de wrote:
I for one would expect that selector to match that element,
although I would never write HTML like that. Imagine a browser or
user stylesheet
Anne van Kesteren:
On Wed, 25 Aug 2010 01:00:50 +0200, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
I'm sure people do: P ALIGN=CENTER ... /P
Sure, but I highly doubt people do that and expect
p[align=center]
to work, especially since that has not always worked in all browsers.
I for one
On Wed, 25 Aug 2010 09:44:34 +0200, Christoph Päper
christoph.pae...@crissov.de wrote:
I for one would expect that selector to match that element, although I
would never write HTML like that. Imagine a browser or user stylesheet
where you would effectively have to list all possible casings.
On Thu, 29 Jul 2010, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 01:32:13 +0200, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
I've been working under the assumption that we want to eradicate as
many differences between XHTML and HTML as possible, and that there's
virtually no compatibility
On Wed, 25 Aug 2010 01:00:50 +0200, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jul 2010, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 01:32:13 +0200, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
I've been working under the assumption that we want to eradicate as
many differences between XHTML and HTML
On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 01:32:13 +0200, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
I've been working under the assumption that we want to eradicate as many
differences between XHTML and HTML as possible, and that there's
virtually
no compatibility constraint on the XHTML side.
If this is an area where we
On Thu, 1 Apr 2010, L. David Baron wrote:
On Thursday 2010-04-01 23:10 -0700, wha...@whatwg.org wrote:
[giow] (0) The CSS rules need to do attribute value matching consistently
across HTML and XHTML, despite the rules for interpreting author style
sheets.
Fixing
On Thursday 2010-04-01 23:10 -0700, wha...@whatwg.org wrote:
[giow] (0) The CSS rules need to do attribute value matching consistently
across HTML and XHTML, despite the rules for interpreting author style sheets.
Fixing http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9335
+ p
On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 23:36:16 -0700, L. David Baron dba...@dbaron.org
wrote:
Making attribute values case-insensitive in XHTML seems incompatible
with longstanding Gecko behavior (though our handling of input's
type attribute is buggy, at least) and with the clear intent of
XHTML1, and doesn't
12 matches
Mail list logo
