W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > March 2003

Re: Against 'start' and 'value' attributes

From: Daniel Glazman <glazman@netscape.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 20:28:13 +0100
Message-ID: <3E6F8A4D.1070604@netscape.com>
To: Toby A Inkster <tobyink@goddamn.co.uk>
CC: "www-html@w3.org" <www-html@w3.org>

Toby A Inkster wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 10:45:21AM +0100, Daniel Glazman wrote:
> | 1. it is possible to traverse a document's tree using the DOM without
> |    having to traverse all attributes. That's the point of parentNode,
> |    firstChild, lastChild, nextSibling and previousSibling.
> | 2. the DOM is not attribute-oriented. To look for all elements carrying
> |    a given attribute, you have to traverse the elements' tree and then
> |    check for attribute presence for every element.
> 
> DOM != XML.

Sure. But it does not change the whole thing.

> 
> | 4. unless you work in a source environment, and unless you can use a
> |    style language having attribute selectors, attributes are not meant
> |    to be presented to the reader and have no influence on the rendering.
> 
> Try explaining to a Lynx user that the "alt" attribute of the <img/> 
> element is not meant to be presented to them and has no influence on its 
> rendering.

Read me better. Lynx does internally what Tantek could describe

   img:partial { content: attr(alt); }

> 
> Try explaining to the user of a graphical browser that the "height" and 
> "width" attributes of the <img/> element have no influence on its 
> rendering.
> 
> | </Daniel>
> 
> You missed your opening <Daniel> tag.

361. You're very precisely the 361th to tell me since 1991.

</Daniel>
Received on Wednesday, 12 March 2003 14:28:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:54 GMT