<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes" ?>
<!DOCTYPE bugzilla SYSTEM "https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/page.cgi?id=bugzilla.dtd">

<bugzilla version="5.0.4"
          urlbase="https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/"
          
          maintainer="sysbot+bugzilla@w3.org"
>

    <bug>
          <bug_id>4346</bug_id>
          
          <creation_ts>2007-02-23 04:18:01 +0000</creation_ts>
          <short_desc>Update user&apos;s manual - we use css 2.1 by default</short_desc>
          <delta_ts>2014-12-17 01:33:31 +0000</delta_ts>
          <reporter_accessible>1</reporter_accessible>
          <cclist_accessible>1</cclist_accessible>
          <classification_id>1</classification_id>
          <classification>Unclassified</classification>
          <product>CSSValidator</product>
          <component>Parser</component>
          <version>CSS Validator</version>
          <rep_platform>Other</rep_platform>
          <op_sys>Windows 3.1</op_sys>
          <bug_status>NEW</bug_status>
          <resolution></resolution>
          
          
          <bug_file_loc>http://setonparish.net/</bug_file_loc>
          <status_whiteboard></status_whiteboard>
          <keywords></keywords>
          <priority>P1</priority>
          <bug_severity>major</bug_severity>
          <target_milestone>---</target_milestone>
          
          
          <everconfirmed>1</everconfirmed>
          <reporter>webmaster</reporter>
          <assigned_to name="This bug has no owner yet - up for the taking">dave.null</assigned_to>
          <cc>dghrjyan</cc>
    
    <cc>fantasai.bugs</cc>
    
    <cc>jukka.k.korpela</cc>
    
    <cc>mike</cc>
    
    <cc>Nasserbufahad</cc>
    
    <cc>ronnin67</cc>
    
    <cc>vincent1984</cc>
          
          <qa_contact name="qa-dev tracking">www-validator-cvs</qa_contact>

      

      

      

          <comment_sort_order>oldest_to_newest</comment_sort_order>  
          <long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>14063</commentid>
    <comment_count>0</comment_count>
    <who name="">webmaster</who>
    <bug_when>2007-02-23 04:18:01 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>User&apos;s manual states that, by default, the W3C online validator will check for compliance against CSS2, the current recommendation.  However, it appears that the validator is actually parsing documents using CSS2.1 rules.

I was getting unexplainable errors when validating my style sheet, which uses the @font-face at-rule.  After digging deep into the specification and a lot of head banging, I finally figured out the problem once I realized I could tell the validator what specification to use.  My style sheet validates against CSS2, but it looks like the @font-face at-rule has been removed in CSS2.1.  This is the first time I had ever made use of this rule and ended up wasting a ton of time chasing ghosts.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>14066</commentid>
    <comment_count>1</comment_count>
    <who name="Olivier Thereaux">ot</who>
    <bug_when>2007-02-23 12:59:05 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>The bug is rather in the manual which should be updated. We used CSS 2.1 as default at this point.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>14537</commentid>
    <comment_count>2</comment_count>
    <who name="">webmaster</who>
    <bug_when>2007-03-26 01:28:30 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>Why would you use CSS 2.1 as the default at this point?  At this point 2.0 is the current recommendation?</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>14538</commentid>
    <comment_count>3</comment_count>
    <who name="Olivier Thereaux">ot</who>
    <bug_when>2007-03-26 01:41:25 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>(In reply to comment #2)
&gt; Why would you use CSS 2.1 as the default at this point?  At this point 2.0 is
&gt; the current recommendation?

CSS 2.1 is generally considered as an errata to CSS2, and in particular, is closer to actual implementations than CSS 2. </thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>16314</commentid>
    <comment_count>4</comment_count>
    <who name="fantasai">fantasai.bugs</who>
    <bug_when>2007-08-28 21:06:36 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>Actually, the CSS validator should be checking against all CR+ level CSS specs by default.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>73688</commentid>
    <comment_count>5</comment_count>
    <who name="Jukka K. Korpela">jukka.k.korpela</who>
    <bug_when>2012-09-12 07:57:35 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>The documentation bug still exists, over 5 years after it was reported here, and now it is a double bug: http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/manual.html says that for the profile parameter, the default value is &quot;the most recent W3C Recommendation: CSS 2&quot;. CSS 2.1 is now the most recent recommendation (regarding CSS as a whole), whereas the default value is now CSS3, though there is no public documentation on what this means. My guess is that the intent is that here &quot;CSS3&quot;, or &quot;CSS Level 3&quot; as it is called in the UI, is CSS 2.1 plus CSS 3 specifications that have CR or REC status.</thetext>
  </long_desc>
      
      

    </bug>

</bugzilla>