Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

what should our namespace be for XHTML extensions? #40

Closed
GoogleCodeExporter opened this issue Mar 24, 2015 · 1 comment
Closed

what should our namespace be for XHTML extensions? #40

GoogleCodeExporter opened this issue Mar 24, 2015 · 1 comment
Labels
Priority-Low Topic-ContentDocs The issue affects EPUB content documents

Comments

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link

We have eliminated the term "OPS Content Documents" in favor of "EPUB Content 
Documents", so the term "ops" no longer has significance in our specs. We could 
certainly still use it as a prefix for "ops:role" attribute etc., but it would 
seem preferable to use "epub3" or "epub" or something else. 

Similar question for vendor prefix for our CSS3 additions, should it be 
"-epub3" or ?

Editor will draft with "epub3:" / "-epub3" for now.

This will be more significant if we need to take lots of things into our 
namespace en route (e.g. if HTML5 isn't done in time).

Original issue reported on code.google.com by whmc...@gmail.com on 31 Oct 2010 at 4:31

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

decision: epub

Original comment by whmc...@gmail.com on 3 Nov 2010 at 11:16

  • Changed state: Answered

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Priority-Low Topic-ContentDocs The issue affects EPUB content documents
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant