W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > December 2002

Re[2]: comments on 2002-12-12 XHTML 2.0 WD

From: Tim Bagot <tsb-w3-html-0006@earth.li>
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 20:34:56 +0000 (UTC)
To: <www-html@w3.org>
Cc: <www-style@w3.org>, Alexander Savenkov <w3@hotbox.ru>, Daniel Glazman <glazou_2000@yahoo.fr>, Mikko Rantalainen <mira@cc.jyu.fi>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0212301950070.1162-100000@213-152-52-166.dsl.eclipse.net.uk>

At 2002-12-30T19:53+0300, Alexander Savenkov wrote:-

> > It is however not entirely clear to me that icons do not belong in style
> > sheets - they are, after all, essentially entirely presentational. On the
> > face of it, icons of this sort do not fit into the CSS framework
> > particularly well, as they seem applicable only to whole pages (or usually
> > collections of pages), whereas CSS would tend to allow an icon to be
> > suggested for any element(s) in a document; OTOH it is certainly not
> > impossible to envisage ways in which icons for elements within a document
> > might be used (e.g. an automatically generated outline).
> Have a look at http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-css3-ui-20020802#box-model.
> According to the draft there's no need in "icon" value for <link>'s
> 'rel' attribute.

Sadly not: that describes displaying an icon in place of an element's
normal content when rendering the document as usual. The desired
functionality here is to provide an icon to represent a resource outside
of this context. I suppose it could be shoehorned into this model, by
saying that the UA is effectively, for example, rendering the entire
document with a UA style sheet such as

html {
  display: icon !important;
  icon: url(file:///some/default/icon)
}

but that seems horribly cumbersome. It is tempting to extend the icon
property to the effect that the icon(s) can be used in external contexts
whatever the value of the display property; but I think that could
interfere with the already proposed usage, especially if such behaviour
were indeed not restricted to the root element (and I see no reason to
impose such an arbitrary constraint). I feel a separate property would
probably be better (though one might also want to rename the icon property
at the same time to avoid confusion).


Tim Bagot
Received on Monday, 30 December 2002 15:35:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:53 GMT