Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon.
Switch to the new Google Groups.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
Message from discussion An alternate take on HTML5
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Robert O'Callahan  
View profile  
 More options Feb 19 2009, 7:22 am
Newsgroups: mozilla.dev.platform
From: Robert O'Callahan <rob...@ocallahan.org>
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 01:22:47 +1300
Local: Thurs, Feb 19 2009 7:22 am
Subject: Re: An alternate take on HTML5
On 19/2/09 11:16 PM, Henri Sivonen wrote:

> Non-rhetorical question: If one works on style system or layout code,
> does it make more sense to read CSS 2.1 or to read the latest Editor's
> Draft of the relevant CSS3 spec?

It depends. CSS 2.1 will tell you what authors are likely to be relying on.

The difference is that CSS3 drafts are more likely to change, and be
changeable, than CSS2.1. That matters to browser implementors and authors.

> If the purpose of "publishing" is to send signals to people other than
> browser implementors, to whom and why?

To let authors know what is stable and to raise their expections that it
actually works in browsers.

We could use annotations in a monolithic document for these things, but
I think it's fair to say that a separate document makes the point better.

Rob


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.