<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: CSS2.2</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.dave-woods.co.uk/index.php/css22/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.dave-woods.co.uk/index.php/css22/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2012 15:57:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: CSS WG Blog &#8211; CSS2.2 and the 2007 CSS Snapshot</title>
		<link>http://www.dave-woods.co.uk/index.php/css22/comment-page-1/#comment-28962</link>
		<dc:creator>CSS WG Blog &#8211; CSS2.2 and the 2007 CSS Snapshot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Sep 2011 23:35:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dave-woods.co.uk/?p=60#comment-28962</guid>
		<description>[...] was a lot of discussion earlier this year around Andy Budd&#8217;s proposal for a CSS2.2. The basic premise [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] was a lot of discussion earlier this year around Andy Budd&#8217;s proposal for a CSS2.2. The basic premise [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave</title>
		<link>http://www.dave-woods.co.uk/index.php/css22/comment-page-1/#comment-9</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:10:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dave-woods.co.uk/?p=60#comment-9</guid>
		<description>Hi Andy,

Thanks for taking the time out to comment and clarify the issue with the border radius. I wasn&#039;t aware that was the reason behind it, so presumably once the official spec is (eventually) released, the -moz- and -webkit- will both be dropped.

I certainly think we need an interim given the timescales on CSS3 but obviously getting the browsers to agree on an interim is also a big ask.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Andy,</p>
<p>Thanks for taking the time out to comment and clarify the issue with the border radius. I wasn&#8217;t aware that was the reason behind it, so presumably once the official spec is (eventually) released, the -moz- and -webkit- will both be dropped.</p>
<p>I certainly think we need an interim given the timescales on CSS3 but obviously getting the browsers to agree on an interim is also a big ask.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andy Budd</title>
		<link>http://www.dave-woods.co.uk/index.php/css22/comment-page-1/#comment-8</link>
		<dc:creator>Andy Budd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:22:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dave-woods.co.uk/?p=60#comment-8</guid>
		<description>Hi Dave,

One of the reasons CSS3 is taking so long is the W3C, spurred on by the browser vendors, is trying to minimise all these inconsistencies. This apparently is no small task.

The issue with border-radius focuses on the way different browsers handle irregular radii. The browser specific extensions are there to show that these features are not part of the official spec yet, and inoculate them from the valid CSS.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Dave,</p>
<p>One of the reasons CSS3 is taking so long is the W3C, spurred on by the browser vendors, is trying to minimise all these inconsistencies. This apparently is no small task.</p>
<p>The issue with border-radius focuses on the way different browsers handle irregular radii. The browser specific extensions are there to show that these features are not part of the official spec yet, and inoculate them from the valid CSS.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

