Re: SVG properties

--90e6ba6136706861da050bc5558c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Hi :)

2015-01-02 22:33 GMT+01:00 Jens Oliver Meiert <[email protected]>:

> I'm not sure what to do with your response but if you're suggesting
> that *all* properties defined in SVG will ultimately make it into CSS
> modules


It's a yes and no answer actually. Any CSS property define within the SVG
specification *is already* a valid CSS property in the context of any SVG
content. It doesn't need to be in any CSS specification to remain a valid
CSS property ;)

A CSS specification define properties that are valid in any context (SVG,
HTML or any other language claiming supporting CSS). Currently, the SVG and
CSS working groups are working on porting some SVG specific CSS properties
define into the SVG specification into separate CSS specifications valid
for any context (See the CSS filter module for example).

But again let's be clear, any CSS property define in a non CSS
specification is always a valid property *for a given context define in its
original specification*.


> *and* that that means that they will also, guaranteed, be
> supported by the CSS validator, then thanks for the affirmation :)
>

This is an entire different issue. Most of the time, the CSS validator is
out of date each time a specification (whether from the CSS WG or from any
other WG) is updated. Having the CSS validator being able to perfectly
match all the spec published by the W3C is totally independent of the state
of any specification. It depends on the time and money the W3C is able to
afford in updating that validator (and sadly the W3C is quite short in
money and human ressources).

The W3C's CSS validator is only informative and certainly not normative in
any way. You should only use it the get some hints but never to be sure
your stylesheet will actually work (which is again another issue 100%
independent from the W3C).

So in conclusion, any CSS property define within the SVG specification *is*
a valid CSS property, even if the CSS validator is telling otherwise. In
any case, the W3C validator is only informative because even if its a valid
property it does not tell you if a browser has implemented it or not.
--
Jeremie
.............................
Web : http://jeremie.patonnier.net
Twitter : @JeremiePat <http://twitter.com/JeremiePat>

--90e6ba6136706861da050bc5558c
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>Hi :)<br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div cl=
ass=3D"gmail_quote">2015-01-02 22:33 GMT+01:00 Jens Oliver Meiert <span dir=
=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" target=3D"_blank">jens@meie=
rt.com</a>&gt;</span>:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin=
:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I&#39;m not sure w=
hat to do with your response but if you&#39;re suggesting<br>
that *all* properties defined in SVG will ultimately make it into CSS<br>
modules</blockquote><div><br></div><div>It&#39;s a yes and no answer actual=
ly. Any CSS property define within the SVG specification *is already* a val=
id CSS property in the context of any SVG content. It doesn&#39;t need to b=
e in any CSS specification to remain a valid CSS property ;)<br><br></div><=
div>A CSS specification define properties that are valid in any context (SV=
G, HTML or any other language claiming supporting CSS). Currently, the SVG =
and CSS working groups are working on porting some SVG specific CSS propert=
ies define into the SVG specification into separate CSS specifications vali=
d for any context (See the CSS filter module for example).<br><br></div><di=
v>But again let&#39;s be clear, any CSS property define in a non CSS specif=
ication is always a valid property *for a given context define in its origi=
nal specification*.<br></div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_qu=
ote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex=
">*and* that that means that they will also, guaranteed, be<br>
supported by the CSS validator, then thanks for the affirmation :)<br></blo=
ckquote><div><br></div><div>This is an entire different issue. Most of the =
time, the CSS validator is out of date each time a specification (whether f=
rom the CSS WG or from any other WG) is updated. Having the CSS validator b=
eing able to perfectly match all the spec published by the W3C is totally i=
ndependent of the state of any specification. It depends on the time and mo=
ney the W3C is able to afford in updating that validator (and sadly the W3C=
 is quite short in money and human ressources).<br><br></div><div>The W3C&#=
39;s CSS validator is only informative and certainly not normative in any w=
ay. You should only use it the get some hints but never to be sure your sty=
lesheet will actually work (which is again another issue 100% independent f=
rom the W3C).<br></div><br clear=3D"all"></div>So in conclusion, any CSS pr=
operty define within the SVG specification *is* a valid CSS property, even =
if the CSS validator is telling otherwise. In any case, the W3C validator i=
s only informative because even if its a valid property it does not tell yo=
u if a browser has implemented it or not.<br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extr=
a">--<br><div class=3D"gmail_signature">Jeremie<br>
<font size=3D"1"><span style=3D"font-family:verdana,sans-serif">...........=
..................</span><br style=3D"font-family:verdana,sans-serif">
  <span style=3D"font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Web : </span><a style=3D"f=
ont-family:verdana,sans-serif" href=3D"http://jeremie.patonnier.net/" targe=
t=3D"_blank">http://jeremie.patonnier.net</a><br style=3D"font-family:verda=
na,sans-serif">
  <span style=3D"font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Twitter : @</span><a style=
=3D"font-family:verdana,sans-serif" href=3D"http://twitter.com/JeremiePat" =
target=3D"_blank">JeremiePat</a></font></div>
</div></div>

--90e6ba6136706861da050bc5558c--