W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-xml@w3.org > January 2011

Re: Use cases

From: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2011 14:51:29 -0500
To: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>, public-html-xml@w3.org
Message-ID: <20110102195129.GF2706@mercury.ccil.org>
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis scripsit:

> HTML does not need another way to express "abstract behavior".

True.  What I meant was that by using the element names to specify it,
there was no place to express the actual semantics of the content.  But I
find that the mechanism du jour for semantics is the "class" attribute.
Fair enough -- as the old SGML farts taught me, the "general identifier"
is really just another attribute value that happens not to have a name.

> CSS encourages semantic (or "abstract behavior") markup, protecting
> the uniform interface.
> 
> CBS would discourage it by making it an extra step, damaging the
> uniform interface.

Very true.  But it would permit genuinely semantic markup (the model) to
specify both its appearance (the view) and its behavior (the controller).

> Witness all the inaccessible junk built out of divs.

Inaccessible because the behavior is specified procedurally rather than
declaratively.

-- 
John Cowan   http://ccil.org/~cowan    cowan@ccil.org
In might the Feanorians / that swore the unforgotten oath
brought war into Arvernien / with burning and with broken troth.
and Elwing from her fastness dim / then cast her in the waters wide,
but like a mew was swiftly borne, / uplifted o'er the roaring tide.
        --the Earendillinwe
Received on Sunday, 2 January 2011 19:52:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 2 January 2011 19:52:03 GMT