tags:

views:

371

answers:

2

I'm using the W3C CSS Validator with the Profile CSS3 but the validator says that my CSS rgba()'s are wrong.

I looked up the Color Module Level 3, and the syntax is the same as mine.

I also tried the Dev-Validator, same result.

Example input:

div.class {
    border: 1px solid rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.5);
}

Am I wrong or why does the validator say that I have that many mistakes with rgba?

+2  A: 

Read this: http://www.css3.info/the-big-css3-validation-debate/ - Might help. Think that's it.

"The problem is that, at present, none of the CSS3 modules have yet receached the status of becoming an official W3C Recommendation, as such any of these specifications could in theory be changed at time, particularly those that are still in the early stage of development."

dscher
A: 

This is a known bug (and I'm sure a patch would be welcome)

David Dorward
I don't think it's a bug. I think it's the fact that the W3 doesn't officially support the usage so it won't validate it.
dscher
1: It is marked as a bug in the W3C's own bug tracker for the CSS Validator! 2: The draft specifications for CSS 3 borders and backgrounds and CSS 3 colors support it. 3: If the validator wasn't going to support those drafts then it wouldn't have a CSS 3 profile in its options!
David Dorward
Have you gone to the validator and tried to input rgba values? Have you copied a declaration directly from the W3 documentation and tried it in the validator. Here, I'll help you: p { color: rgba(0,0,255,0.5) }Go to the validator and see what you find. Just because you found a "NEW" bug that seems to match the description of the problem doesn't mean that it's the answer!(sic)
dscher
I have read the documentation. I have constructed a test case that matched it. I have confirmed that it doesn't work in the validator. There are now at least three independent views that the bug is a bug. A quick look at the source code suggests that your example passes because the color property has a CSS3 entry in the source but the border property does not.
David Dorward