A few anomalies in the draft...

Chris Wilson (cwilso@microsoft.com)
Wed, 31 Jan 1996 09:55:38 -0800

A few other things I've noted in the draft, some of which are essentially
typos...
1) Anchor pseudo-classes: The ":link" pseudo-class seems redundant. Isn't
this just the default behaviour for <A>? The only use I could see is for
setting properties on unvisited links that don't show up on visited links,
but allowing those properties to be inherited on visited links. Or is this
to allow the distinction of <A> tags without HREFs? At the very least, I
believe the pseudo-class name should be changed to "unvisited" to make this
difference evident.

2) I still feel the requirement of indicating to the reader which
stylesheets are in effect and allowing individual control of them is out of
place as a conformance requirement. It adds unnecessary complexity to the
UI when the main goal can be accomplished in an application-specific way
(e.g., "Ignore stylesheets" toggle and accessibility stylesheets).

3) The vertical-align description makes reference to the <C> tag - this
should be changed to <SPAN>.

4) Vertical-align: 'text-top' is described as "align with the top of the
parent element's font". Align WHAT with the top of the parent element's
font? The top of this element? 'text-bottom' and 'baseline' have the same
ambiguities ('baseline' is only ambiguous when considering images or tables;
any item that does not necessarily have a baseline).

5) It is stated that pseudo-classing a selector that already uses a class,
e.g.:
H.foo:first-letter { vertical-align: top; font-size: 300%; float: left }
is allowed, but the order of the class and pseudo-class is not. Is any
order allowed, or only element.class:pseudoclass? This should be explicitly
stated.

6) An example of how to do a drop-cap might be nice.

That's about it for now... :^)

-Chris
Chris Wilson
cwilso@microsoft.com