CSS Conditional Rules Module Level 3

Abstract

CSS is a language for describing the rendering of structured documents (such as HTML and XML) on screen, on paper, in speech, etc. This module contains the features of CSS for conditional processing of parts of style sheets, conditioned on capabilities of the processor or the document the style sheet is being applied to. It includes and extends the functionality of CSS level 2 [CSS21], which builds on CSS level 1 [CSS1]. The main extensions compared to level 2 are allowing nesting of certain at-rules inside ‘@media’, the addition of the ‘@supports’ and ‘@document’ rules for conditional processing.

Status of this document

This section describes the status of this document at the time of its publication. Other documents may supersede this document. A list of current W3C publications and the latest revision of this technical report can be found in the W3C technical reports index at https://www.w3.org/TR/.

Publication as a Working Draft does not imply endorsement by the W3C Membership. This is a draft document and may be updated, replaced or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to cite this document as other than work in progress.

The (archived) public mailing list www-style@w3.org (see instructions) is preferred for discussion of this specification. When sending e-mail, please put the text “css3-conditional” in the subject, preferably like this: “[css3-conditional] …summary of comment…”

This document was produced by the CSS Working Group (part of the Style Activity).

This document was produced by a group operating under the 5 February 2004 W3C Patent Policy. W3C maintains a public list of any patent disclosures made in connection with the deliverables of the group; that page also includes instructions for disclosing a patent. An individual who has actual knowledge of a patent which the individual believes contains Essential Claim(s) must disclose the information in accordance with section 6 of the W3C Patent Policy.

This is the First Public Working Draft of the CSS Conditional Rules Module Level 3.

The following features are at risk:

• The inclusion of ‘@font-face’ rules and ‘@keyframes’ rules as allowed within all of the @-rules in this specification is at risk, though only because of the relative rates of advancement of specifications. If this specification is able to advance faster than one or both of the specifications defining those rules, then the inclusion of those rules will move from this specification to the specification defining those rules.
• The addition of support for @-rules inside of conditional grouping rules is at risk; if interoperable implementations are not found, it may be removed to advance the other features in this specification to Proposed Recommendation.
• The ‘@supports’ rule is at risk; if interoperable implementations are not found, it may be removed to advance the other features in this specification to Proposed Recommendation.
• The ‘@document’ rule is at risk; if interoperable implementations are not found, it may be removed to advance the other features in this specification to Proposed Recommendation.

Table of contents

• 1. Introduction
  • 1.1. Background
  • 1.2. Module Interactions
  • 1.3. Document Conventions
• 2. Processing of conditional group rules
• 3. Contents of conditional group rules
• 4. Placement of conditional group rules
• 5. Media-specific style sheets: the ‘@media’ rule
• 6. Feature queries: the ‘@supports’ rule
  • 6.1. Definition of support
  • 6.2. Partial implementations
• 7. Document queries: the ‘@document’ rule
• 8. Conformance
  • 8.1. Base Modules
  • 8.2. Conformance Classes
  • 8.3. Partial Implementations
  • 8.4. Experimental Implementations
  • 8.5. CR Exit Criteria
• Grammar
• Acknowledgments
• References
  • Normative references
  • Other references
• Index

1. Introduction

1.1. Background

This section is not normative.

[CSS21] defines one type of conditional group rule, the ‘@media’ rule, and allows only rulesets (not other @-rules) inside of it. The ‘@media’ rule provides the ability to have media-specific style sheets, which is also provided by style sheet linking features such as ‘@import’ and <link>. The restrictions on the contents of ‘@media’ rules made them less useful; they have forced authors using CSS features involving @-rules in media-specific style sheets to use separate style sheets for each medium.

This specification extends the rules for the contents of conditional group rules to allow other @-rules, which enables authors to combine CSS features involving @-rules with media specific style sheets within a single style sheet.

This specification also defines additional types of conditional group rules, ‘@supports’ and ‘@document’, to address author and user requirements.

The ‘@supports’ rule allows CSS to be conditioned on implementation support for CSS properties and values. This rule makes it much easier for authors to use new CSS features and provide good fallback for implementations that do not support those features. This is particularly important for CSS features that provide new layout mechanisms, and for other cases where a set of related styles needs to be conditioned on property support.

The ‘@document’ rule allows CSS to be conditioned on the page to which the style sheet is being applied. This allows users to apply styles to a particular page or group of pages, which greatly increases the power of user style sheets.

1.2. Module Interactions

This module replaces and extends the ‘@media’ rule feature defined in [CSS21] section 7.2.1 and incorporates the modifications previously made non-normatively by [MEDIAQ] section 1.

Its current definition depends on @-rules defined in [CSS3FONT] and [CSS3-ANIMATIONS], but that dependency is only on the assumption that those modules will advance ahead of this one. If this module advances faster, then the dependency will be reversed.

1.3. Document Conventions

Conformance requirements are expressed with a combination of descriptive assertions and RFC 2119 terminology. The key words “MUST”, “MUST NOT”, “REQUIRED”, “SHALL”, “SHALL NOT”, “SHOULD”, “SHOULD NOT”, “RECOMMENDED”, “MAY”, and “OPTIONAL” in the normative parts of this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119. However, for readability, these words do not appear in all uppercase letters in this specification.

All of the text of this specification is normative except sections explicitly marked as non-normative, examples, and notes. [RFC2119]

Examples in this specification are introduced with the words “for example” or are set apart from the normative text with class="example", like this:

Informative notes begin with the word “Note” and are set apart from the normative text with class="note", like this:

Note, this is an informative note.

2. Processing of conditional group rules

This specification defines some CSS @-rules, called conditional group rules, that associate a condition with a group of other CSS rules. These different rules allow testing different types of conditions, but share common behavior for how their contents are used when the condition is true and when the condition is false.

@media print {
  #navigation { display: none }
}

@document url("https://www.example.com/") {
  #example1 { display: none }
}

Each conditional group rule has a condition, which at any time evaluates to true or false. When the condition is true, CSS processors must apply the rules inside the group rule as though they were at the group rule's location; when the condition is false, CSS processors must not apply any of rules inside the group rule. The current state of the condition does not affect the CSS object model, in which the contents of the group rule always remain within the group rule.

This means that when multiple conditional group rules are nested, a rule inside of both of them applies only when all of the rules' conditions are true.

@media print { // rule (1)
  #navigation { display: none }
  @media (max-width: 12cm) { // rule (2)
    .note { float: none }
  }
}

When the condition for a conditional group rule changes, CSS processors must reflect that the rules now apply or no longer apply, except for properties whose definitions define effects of computed values that persist past the lifetime of that value (such as for some properties in [CSS3-TRANSITIONS] and [CSS3-ANIMATIONS]).

3. Contents of conditional group rules

There is also likely demand for using these conditions with ‘@import’. We should see if we can come up with sensible syntax for that, perhaps functional notation at the end of the ‘@import’ rule.

The syntax of each conditional group rule consists of some syntax specific to the type of rule followed by a group rule body, which is a block (pair of braces) containing a sequence of rules.

A group rule body is allowed to contain rulesets and any @-rules that are allowed at the top level of a style sheet before and after a ruleset. This means that @-rules that must occur at the beginning of the style sheet (such as ‘@charset’, ‘@import’, and ‘@namespace’ rules) are not allowed inside of conditional group rules. Conditional group rules can be nested.

In terms of the grammar, this specification defines the following productions for use in the grammar of conditional group rules:

nested_statement
  : ruleset | media | page | font_face_rule | keyframes-rule |
    supports_rule | document_rule
  ;
group_rule_body
  : '{' S* nested_statement* '}' S*
  ;

in which all the productions are defined in that grammar with the exception of font_face_rule not defined in [CSS3FONT], keyframes-rule shouldn't have dash? defined in [CSS3-ANIMATIONS], and media, supports_rule and document_rule defined in this specification.

In general, future CSS specifications that add new @-rules that are not forbidden to occur after some other types of rules should modify this nested_statement production to keep the grammar accurate.

Style sheets must not use rules other than the allowed ones inside conditional group rules.

CSS processors must ignore rules that are not allowed within a group rule, and must handle invalid rules inside of group rules as described in section 4.2 (Rules for handling parsing errors), section 4.1.5 (At-rules), and section 4.1.7 (Rule sets, declaration blocks, and selectors) of [CSS21].

4. Placement of conditional group rules

Conditional group rules are allowed at the top-level of a style sheet, and inside other conditional group rules. CSS processors must process such rules as described above.

Any rules that are not allowed after a ruleset (e.g., ‘@charset’, ‘@import’, or ‘@namespace’ rules) are also not allowed after a conditional group rule. Therefore, style sheets must not place such rules after a conditional group rules, and CSS processors must ignore such rules.

5. Media-specific style sheets: the ‘@media’ rule

The ‘@media’ rule is a conditional group rule whose condition is a media query. It consists of the at-keyword ‘@media’ followed by a (possibly empty) media query (as defined in [MEDIAQ]), followed by a group rule body. The condition of the rule is the result of the media query.

@media print, (max-width: 600px) {
  #extra_navigation { display: none }
}

In terms of the grammar, this specification extends the media production in the Grammar of CSS 2.1 ([CSS21], Appendix G) into:

media
  : MEDIA_SYM S+ media_query_list group_rule_body
  ;

where the group_rule_body production is defined in this specification, the media_query_list production is defined in [MEDIAQ], and the others are defined in the Grammar of CSS 2.1 ([CSS21], Appendix G).

This changes the S* in CSS 2.1 into S+. Is that correct?

6. Feature queries: the ‘@supports’ rule

The ‘@supports’ rule is a conditional group rule whose condition tests whether the user agent supports CSS property:value pairs. Authors can use it to write style sheets that use new features when available but degrade gracefully when those features are not supported. CSS has existing mechanisms for graceful degradation, such as ignoring unsupported properties or values, but these are not always sufficient when large groups of styles need to be tied to the support for certain features, as is the case for use of new layout system features.

The syntax of the condition in the ‘@supports’ rule is slightly more complicated than for the other conditional group rules (though has some similarities to media queries) since:

• negation is needed so that the new-feature styles and the fallback styles can be separated (within the forward-compatible grammar's rules for the syntax of @-rules), and not required to override each other
• conjunction (and) is needed so that multiple required features can be tested
• disjunction (or) is needed when there are multiple alternative features for a set of styles, particularly when some of those alternatives are vendor-prefixed properties or values

Therefore, the syntax of the ‘@supports’ rule allows testing for property:value pairs, and arbitrary conjunctions (and), disjunctions (or), and negations (not) of them.

This extends the lexical scanner in the Grammar of CSS 2.1 ([CSS21], Appendix G) by adding:

@{S}{U}{P}{P}{O}{R}{T}{S}	{return SUPPORTS_SYM;}

and the grammar by adding

supports_rule
  : SUPPORTS_SYM S+ supports_condition group_rule_body
  ;
supports_condition
  : supports_negation | supports_conjunction | supports_disjunction |
    supports_declaration_condition
  ;
supports_negation
  : 'not' S* supports_condition_in_parens
  ;
supports_conjunction
  : supports_condition_in_parens ( 'and' S* supports_condition_in_parens )+
  ;
supports_disjunction
  : supports_condition_in_parens ( 'or' S* supports_condition_in_parens )+
  ;
supports_condition_in_parens
  : ( '(' supports_condition ')' S* ) | supports_declaration_condition
  ;
supports_declaration_condition
  : '(' S* core_declaration ')' S*
  ;

in which core_declaration is the production declaration in the core syntax of CSS defined in section 4.1.1 (Tokenization) of [CSS21].

Any ‘@supports’ rule that does not parse according to the grammar above is invalid. Style sheets must not use such a rule and processors must ignore such a rule.

Note that this means that declarations that meet the forward-compatible syntax for declarations are permitted (and support for them is then tested by the ‘@supports’ rule), but declarations that do not meet the forward-compatible syntax for declarations cause the entire ‘@supports’ rule to be ignored.

Is any further allowance for forward-compatible parsing needed, for example, to allow additional features (such as, say, selector tests) to be added to the ‘@supports’ rule? Or are these forward-compatible parsing rules the best solution for such future expansion anyway?

Each of these grammar terms is associated with a boolean result, as follows:

supports_condition

The result is the result of the single child term.

supports_negation

The result is the negation of the result of the supports_condition_in_parens child term.

supports_conjunction

The result is true if the result of all of the supports_condition_in_parens child terms is true; otherwise it is false.

supports_disjunction

The result is true if the result of any of the supports_condition_in_parens child terms is true; otherwise it is false.

supports_condition_in_parens

The result is the result of the single supports_condition or supports_declaration_condition child term.

supports_declaration_condition

The result is whether the CSS processor supports the declaration.

The condition of the ‘@supports’ rule is the result of the supports_condition term that is a child of the supports_rule term.

@supports ( display: flexbox ) {
  body, #navigation, #content { display: flexbox; }
  #navigation { background: blue; color: white; }
  #article { background: white; color: black; }
}

@supports not ( display: flexbox ) {
  body { width: 100%; height: 100%; background: white; color: black; }
  #navigation { width: 25%; }
  #article { width: 75%; }
}

@supports ( box-shadow: 2px 2px 2px black ) or
          ( -moz-box-shadow: 2px 2px 2px black ) or
          ( -webkit-box-shadow: 2px 2px 2px black ) or
          ( -o-box-shadow: 2px 2px 2px black ) {
  .outline {
    color: white;
    box-shadow: 2px 2px 2px black;
    -moz-box-shadow: 2px 2px 2px black;
    -webkit-box-shadow: 2px 2px 2px black;
    -o-box-shadow: 2px 2px 2px black;
  }
}

To avoid confusion between ‘and’ and ‘or’, the syntax requires that both ‘and’ and ‘or’ be specified explicitly (rather than, say, using commas or spaces for one of them). Likewise, to avoid confusion caused by precedence rules, the syntax does not allow ‘and’, ‘or’, and ‘not’ operators to be mixed without a layer of parentheses.

@supports (transition-property: color) or
          (animation-name: foo) and
          (transform: rotate(10deg)) {
  // ...
}

@supports ((transition-property: color) or
           (animation-name: foo)) and
          (transform: rotate(10deg)) {
  // ...
}

@supports (transition-property: color) or
          ((animation-name: foo)) and
           (transform: rotate(10deg))) {
  // ...
}

6.1. Definition of support

A CSS processor is considered to support a declaration (consisting of a property and value) if it implements the given value of the given property.

6.2. Partial implementations

For forward-compatibility, section 4.1.8 (Declarations and properties) of [CSS21] defines rules for handling invalid properties and values. CSS processors that partially implement a specification must treat any part of a value that they:

• do not implement, or
• do not have a usable level of support for,

as invalid according to this rule, and must not accept or support a declaration containing such a value. This allows authors to use fallback (either in the [CSS1] sense of declarations that are overridden by later declarations or with the new capabilities provided by the ‘@supports’ rule in this specification) that works correctly for the features implemented. This applies especially to compound values; implementations must implement all parts of the value in order to consider the declaration supported, either inside a ruleset or in the declaration condition of an ‘@supports’ rule.

7. Document queries: the ‘@document’ rule

The ‘@document’ rule is a conditional group rule whose condition depends on the URL of the document being styled. This allows style sheets, particularly user style sheets, to have styles that only apply to a set of pages rather than to all pages using the style sheet.

Given that this @-rule is intended primarily for user style sheets, what should this specification say about its use in author style sheets? Should it be forbidden? Should use instead be discouraged? Or should this specification remain neutral on the topic, since there are valid uses in author style sheets?

The URL of the document being styled is the URI at which the document is located, excluding any fragment identifiers. (This means, for example, that HTTP redirects have been followed.) If the styles are being applied inside a complete document embedded into the presentation of another (e.g., [HTML5]'s iframe, object, or img elements), the relevant URI is that of the frame, not of its container. However, if content from other documents is mixed in via mechanisms that mix content from one document into another (e.g., [SVG11]'s use element), then the address of the container document is used.

Note: In [HTML5], this is the document's address of a document in a browsing context.

The ‘@document’ rule's condition is written as a comma-separated list of URL matching functions, and the condition evaluates to true whenever any one of those functions evaluates to true. The following URL matching functions are permitted:

<url>

The ‘url()’ function is the exact url matching function. It evaluates to true whenever the URL of the document being styled is exactly the URL given.

The ‘url()’ function, since it is a core syntax element in CSS, is allowed (subject to different character limitations and thus escaping requirements) to contain an unquoted value (in addition to the string values that are allowed as arguments for all four functions).

For example, this rule:

@document url("https://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/") {
  #summary { background: yellow; color: black}
}

styles the summary element on the page https://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/, but not on any other pages.

url-prefix(<string>)

The ‘url-prefix()’ function is the url prefix matching function. It evaluates to true whenever the URL of the document being styled has the argument to the function as an initial substring (which is true when the two strings are equal). When the argument is the empty string, it evaluates to true for all documents.

For example, this rule:

@document url-prefix("https://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/") {
  #summary { background: yellow; color: black}
}

styles the summary element on the page https://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/ and on the page https://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test, but it does not affect the page https://www.w3.org/ or the page https://www.example.com/Style/CSS/.

domain(<string>)

The ‘domain()’ function is the domain matching function. It evaluates to true whenever the URL of the document being styled has a host subcomponent (as defined in [URI]) and that host subcomponent is exactly the argument to the ‘domain()’ function or a final substring of the host component is a period (U+002E) immediately followed by the argument to the ‘domain()’ function.

For example, this rule:

@document domain("w3.org") {
  body { font-size: 16px ! important }
}

changes the font size of the body element for pages such as https://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/ and https://w3.org/Style/CSS/ and https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/ but it does not affect the page https://www.example.com/Style/CSS/.

regexp(<string>)

The contents of the <string> argument must match the JavaScript Pattern production ([ECMA-262-5.1], section 15.10.1). However, failing to do so is not a CSS syntax error and does not trigger any error handling for CSS syntax errors.

The ‘regexp()’ function evaluates to true whenever the string argument compiled as a JavaScript regular expression with the global, ignoreCase and multiline flags disabled (see [ECMA-262-5.1], sections 15.10.7.2 through 15.10.7.4) compiles successfully and the resulting regular expression matches the entirety of the URL of the document being styled.

Note that regular expression must match the entire URL, not just a part of it.

Note that this definition intentionally matches the behavior of the pattern attribute on the input element in [HTML5].

For example, this rule:

@document regexp("https://www.w3.org/TR/\\d{4}/[^/]*-CSS2-\\d{8}/") {
  body { font-size: 20px ! important }
}

changes the font size of the body element for pages such as https://www.w3.org/TR/2011/PR-CSS2-20110412/.

Note that the backslashes in the regular expression require CSS escaping as ‘\\’.

Implementations must treat any unknown URL matching functions as a syntax error, and thus ignore the ‘@document’ rule. Should we instead have more complicated error handling rules to make forward-compatibility work differently, or is this rule the best solution for such future expansion anyway?

This extends the lexical scanner in the Grammar of CSS 2.1 ([CSS21], Appendix G) by adding:

@{D}{O}{C}{U}{M}{E}{N}{T}	{return DOCUMENT_SYM;}

and the grammar by adding

document_rule
  : DOCUMENT_SYM S+ url_match_fn ( "," S* url_match_fn )* group_rule_body
  ;
url_match_fn
  : (URI | FUNCTION) S*
  ;

8. Conformance

8.1. Base Modules

This specification defines conformance in terms of base modules, which are modules that this specification builds on top of. The base modules of this module are:

• [CSS21]

All of the conformance requirements of all base modules are incorporated as conformance requirements of this module, except where overridden by this module.

Additionally, all conformance requirements related to validity of syntax in this module and all of its base modules are to be interpreted as though all syntax in all of those modules is valid.

Additionally, the set of valid syntax can be increased by the conformance of a style sheet or processor to additional modules; use of such syntax does not make a style sheet nonconformant and failure to treat such syntax as invalid does not make a processor nonconformant.

8.2. Conformance Classes

Conformance to the CSS Conditional Rules Module is defined for three conformance classes:

style sheet

A CSS style sheet.

processor

A tool that reads CSS style sheets: it may be a renderer or user-agent that interprets the semantics of a style sheet and renders documents that use style sheets, or it may be a validator that checks style sheets.

authoring tool

A tool that writes a style sheet.

A style sheet is conformant to the CSS Conditional Rules Module if it meets all of the conformance requirements in the module that are described as requirements of style sheets.

A processor is conformant to the CSS Conditional Rules Module if it meets all applicable conformance requirements in the module that are described as requirements of processors. In general, all requirements are applicable to renderers. Requirements concerning a part of CSS not performed by a processor are not applicable, e.g., requirements related to rendering are not applicable to a validator. The inability of a processor to correctly render a document due to limitations of the device does not make it non-conformant. (For example, a renderer is not required to render color on a monochrome monitor.)

An authoring tool is conformant to the CSS Conditional Rules Module if it writes style sheets that conform to the module and (if it reads CSS) it is a conformant processor.

8.3. Partial Implementations

So that authors can exploit the forward-compatible parsing rules to assign fallback values, CSS renderers must treat as invalid (and ignore as appropriate) any at-rules, properties, property values, keywords, and other syntactic constructs for which they have no usable level of support. In particular, user agents must not selectively ignore unsupported component values and honor supported values in a single multi-value property declaration: if any value is considered invalid (as unsupported values must be), CSS requires that the entire declaration be ignored.

8.4. Experimental Implementations

To avoid clashes with future CSS features, the CSS specifications reserve a prefixed syntax for proprietary property and value extensions to CSS. The CSS Working Group recommends that experimental implementations of features in CSS Working Drafts also use vendor-prefixed property or value names. This avoids any incompatibilities with future changes in the draft. Once a specification reaches the Candidate Recommendation stage, implementors should implement the non-prefixed syntax for any feature they consider to be correctly implemented according to spec.

8.5. CR Exit Criteria

For this specification to be advanced to Proposed Recommendation, there must be at least two independent, interoperable implementations of each feature. Each feature may be implemented by a different set of products, there is no requirement that all features be implemented by a single product. For the purposes of this criterion, we define the following terms:

independent

each implementation must be developed by a different party and cannot share, reuse, or derive from code used by another qualifying implementation. Sections of code that have no bearing on the implementation of this specification are exempt from this requirement.

interoperable

passing the respective test case(s) in the official CSS test suite, or, if the implementation is not a Web browser, an equivalent test. Every relevant test in the test suite should have an equivalent test created if such a user agent (UA) is to be used to claim interoperability. In addition if such a UA is to be used to claim interoperability, then there must one or more additional UAs which can also pass those equivalent tests in the same way for the purpose of interoperability. The equivalent tests must be made publicly available for the purposes of peer review.

implementation

a user agent which:

1. implements the specification.
2. is available to the general public. The implementation may be a shipping product or other publicly available version (i.e., beta version, preview release, or “nightly build”). Non-shipping product releases must have implemented the feature(s) for a period of at least one month in order to demonstrate stability.
3. is not experimental (i.e., a version specifically designed to pass the test suite and is not intended for normal usage going forward).

The specification will remain Candidate Recommendation for at least six months.

Grammar

In order to allow these new @-rules in CSS style sheets, this specification modifies the stylesheet production in the Appendix G grammar of [CSS21] by replacing the media production defined in [CSS21] with the media production defined in this one, and additionally inserting | supports_rule | document_rule alongside ruleset | media | page.

Acknowledgments

Thanks to the ideas and feedback from Tantek Çelik, Elika Etemad, Pascal Germroth, Björn Höhrmann, Alex Mogilevsky, Chris Moschini, Ben Ward, Zack Weinberg, Boris Zbarsky, and all the rest of the www-style community.

References

Normative references

[CSS21]

Bert Bos; et al. Cascading Style Sheets Level 2 Revision 1 (CSS 2.1) Specification. 7 June 2011. W3C Recommendation. URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/2011/REC-CSS2-20110607

[CSS3-ANIMATIONS]

Dean Jackson; David Hyatt; Chris Marrin. CSS Animations Module Level 3. 20 March 2009. W3C Working Draft. (Work in progress.) URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-css3-animations-20090320

[CSS3FONT]

John Daggett. CSS Fonts Module Level 3. 24 March 2011. W3C Working Draft. (Work in progress.) URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-css3-fonts-20110324

[ECMA-262-5.1]

ECMAScript Language Specification, Edition 5.1. June 2011. ISO/IEC 16262:2011. URL: https://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-262.htm

[MEDIAQ]

Håkon Wium Lie; et al. Media Queries. 27 July 2010. W3C Candidate Recommendation. (Work in progress.) URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/2010/CR-css3-mediaqueries-20100727/

[RFC2119]

S. Bradner. Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels. Internet RFC 2119. URL: https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt

[URI]

T. Berners-Lee; R. Fielding; L. Masinter. Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI): generic syntax. January 2005. Internet RFC 3986. URL: https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt

Other references

[CSS1]

Håkon Wium Lie; Bert Bos. Cascading Style Sheets (CSS1) Level 1 Specification. 11 April 2008. W3C Recommendation. URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-CSS1-20080411

[CSS3-TRANSITIONS]

Dean Jackson; et al. CSS Transitions Module Level 3. 1 December 2009. W3C Working Draft. (Work in progress.) URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-css3-transitions-20091201

[HTML5]

Ian Hickson. HTML5. 25 May 2011. W3C Working Draft. (Work in progress.) URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-html5-20110525/

[SVG11]

Erik Dahlström; et al. Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG) 1.1 (Second Edition). 9 June 2011. W3C Proposed Recommendation. (Work in progress.) URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/2011/PR-SVG11-20110609/

Index

• conditional group rules, 2.
• conformance
  • authoring tool, 8.2.
  • processor, 8.2.
  • style sheet, 8.2.
• ‘@document’ rule, 7.
• domain(), 7.
• domain matching function, 7.
• exact url matching function, 7.
• group rule body, 3.
• ‘@media’ rule, 5.
• regexp(), 7.
• support, 6.1.
• ‘@supports’ rule, 6.
• url(), 7.
• URL matching functions, 7.
  • domain, 7.
  • exact, 7.
  • prefix, 7.
  • regular expression, 7.
• URL of the document being styled, 7.
• url-prefix(), 7.
• url prefix matching function, 7.