W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 1999

Re: New WD: CSS3 selectors

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 1999 05:17:25 +0200
Message-ID: <37AE4845.35B14AAA@w3.org>
To: Frank Boumphrey <bckman@ix.netcom.com>
CC: jelks@jelks.nu, www-style@w3.org


Frank Boumphrey wrote:
> 
> But is there any
> > real reason for CSS *excluding* recognition of class in XML, in other
> words --
> > providing automatic recognition of class (or CLASS) regardless of the
> semantics
> > of the markup language in question?
> 
> My feeling was that in XML the element WAS the class!

Each element has one name, but class is a space separated list (a set)
so elements can be subclassed, different-named elements can be put in
the same class, and so on.

For XML, class is really useful.

Initial experiments seem to show that real XML+CSS implementations
ignore the bit about "only HTML" and accept .foo as a selector for <elem
class="foo"/> for xml too.

It might be a good idea to formally acknowledge this, since IIRC the
intention was to say "XML gramars might not do this, don't count on it"
rather than "Thou Shalt Not".


> > or using other attributes. But would it do *harm* to have a CSS '.attval'
> > represent a shorthand of '[class="attval"]' -- even if it's not in
> HTML/XHTML,
> > where CLASS has a certain semantic?

No, I don't think it would do harm and it could certainly do good.

A redirection/renaming syntax might be useful, too, though it can always
be expressed in a longer form anyways so is not strictly necessary. 

But in the meantime, useful work can be done with XML grammars that
choose to have a class attribute.

--
Chris
Received on Monday, 9 August 1999 00:46:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:00 GMT