RE: [dita] Updated feature 20

["Grosso, Paul" <pgrosso@ptc.com>]

Yes, I agree with the XSL (not XSLT) reference.

 

CSS3 is not yet a Recommendation, and interoperable support is

only guaranteed for those referenced by XSL and the HTML DTD.

 

paul

---

From: Michael Priestley [mailto:mpriestl@ca.ibm.com]
Sent: Monday, 2006 May 22 22:37
To: Paul Prescod
Cc: dita@lists.oasis-open.org; Esrig, Bruce (Bruce); Paul Prescod; Robert D Anderson; Su-Laine Yeo
Subject: [dita] Updated feature 20

>
> We proposed to take out the list of colour names in the
> specification. They could be included by reference as suggested by
> Paul Grosso.
>
> On the other hand, the link to the XSLT specification implies that
> DITAVAL processors should support the syntaxes defined here:
>
> http://www.w3.org/TR/xsl/slice5.html#expr-color-functions
>
> We should be explicit about what syntaxes we support. I personally
> would like to know whether XSL will synchronize with SVG and CSS as
> defined here:
>
> http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-color/#svg-color
>
> Somehow we need a clear definition of what syntax the attribute
> supports. It doesn't matter much what the syntax is.

I don't have a decision here. In the absence of input, I am picking the existing XSLT reference because the list of colors is shorter.