Steve Knoblock wrote: >Are you saying that if I specify a default font-size in the included HTML >and a default font-size in the main page, that both should adjust at the >same time? As a matter of course? Only if both are relative to the font-size of the UA default sylesheet. For example, with this declaration: BODY { font-size: 1.1 em } /* relative sizing */ the font size in the document should change when the UA default is changed, regardless of whether it is the main or an included document. But with this declaration: BODY { font-size: 12pt } /* absolute sizing */ it should not. If a UA is going to override an author's absolute font-size specification, it should be as part of a 'magnification' process that resizes all elements. >I'm looking at it from a practical viewpoint, looking to avoid hacks like >frames and finicky server side includes. I'd be happy to see some other way >to better accomplish the same thing than using OBJECT if needed. I don't understand in what ways SSI is more finicky than CSI. The proxy/caching problem is worse with CSI, since you might wind up with a composite document with unmatched parts. >Does the document have to be a full HTML document? Could the included >document be an HTML fragment, as with SSI now? Well, besides more practical reasons noted by Albert Lunde, the element name implies a single entity. David PerrellReceived on Saturday, 29 November 1997 22:54:24 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:53:53 GMT