W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2003

Re: XBL is (mostly) W3C redundant, and CSS is wrong W3C layer for semantic behavior *markup*

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 01:10:18 +0000 (GMT)
To: Shelby Moore <shelby@coolpage.com>
Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0301020101520.15896-100000@dhalsim.dreamhost.com>

On Wed, 1 Jan 2003, Shelby Moore wrote:
>
> At 11:30 PM 1/1/2003 +0000, Ian Hickson wrote:
>>> "SEMANTIC BINDING"
>>> ------------------
>>>
>>> The way a semantic markup element is bound to the implementation
>>> which defines it's semantics.
>>
>> Could you give a definition of "non-semantic binding" first?
> 
> Any _mechanism_ of binding which does not define (create, change, augment,
> subclass, etc) semantics.

So would you agree with the following definitions?

   Semantics
      The intrinsic meaning of an element.

   Defining of semantics
      The act by which the intrinsic meaning of an element is created,
      changed, augmented, or subclassed.

   Binding
      A mechanism which associates an element with something.

   Non-semantic binding
      A mechanism of binding that does not define semantics.

   Semantic binding
      The way a semantic markup element is bound to the implementation
      which defines its semantics.

If so, could you also define the word "implementation" as used in the last
of these definitions?

It would also be helpful if you could suggest what the "something" in the
definition of "binding" is.

I think we are making good progress here.

-- 
Ian Hickson                                      )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
"meow"                                          /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
http://index.hixie.ch/                         `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 1 January 2003 20:10:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:18 GMT