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

Re: Another view (sorry) on XBL and behaviours

From: Shelby Moore <shelby@coolpage.com>
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 11:05:27 -0600
Message-Id: <4.1.20030106110149.0193e860(null)>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Cc: www-style@w3.org

At 11:57 AM 1/6/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>> XBL files (as HTCs in IE) provide a layer of encapsulation that may be
>> useful to some programmers. However, they do not themselves provide any
>> real extra functionality; everything that can be done with them could be
>> done with a little extra inconvenience using plain [Java|J|ECMA]Script,
>> coupled with DOM Level 2 Events.
>This is not quite true.  One difference that Ian has pointed out, for example,
>is the ability for the user to override specific behaviors.  This ability is
>provided by the encapsulation of behaviors into an external resource (an XBL
>binding, eg) which is then somehow attached to an element.  This means that
>overriding the behavior merely involves severing that attachment.

Yeah like changing an XSLT transformation.

No XBL needed.  XSLT already a standard.

>Sure it does.  That's been the trend for what? 10 years now?  Witness most of
>the CSS selectors module.  All of that _could_ be done using the DOM and
>style (eg treewalker).  Why is it not?  Convenience, imo ("separation of
>content and presentation does not cut it; it would have been easy to just
>simple syntax for "presentational script inclusion" or something like that).

Let the world build these conveniences in a layer above the UA, which can
be shared, so that we remove the monopoly (and slowness) of same UA teams.

XSLT is a layer to do that.

>> But does that mean the W3C should call it a standard and ask other
>> implementors to support it?
>That depends on how much need there is of such a feature... the fact that IE
>and Mozilla have both felt they needed to implement something like it means
>there must be _some_ demand.  The question is, how much.

How much demand is there for Mozilla?

I agree demand for abstracting scripting, and we have standards for that
already, XEvents, XSLT, etc..

We do not need a proliferation of overly specialized standards controlled
by the "few".

-Shelby Moore
Received on Monday, 6 January 2003 12:04:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:05 UTC