W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2004

Re: [css3-hyperlinks] inclusion of Clink in next WD

From: Anne van Kesteren (fora) <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 10:18:01 +0100
To: Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, www-style@w3.org
Message-id: <40518049.90504@annevankesteren.nl>

Tantek Çelik wrote:

>On 3/11/04 10:26 AM, "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU> wrote:
>>That was merely a proposal to resolve the logical contradiction.  The precise
>>proposal was "Whether :link matches or not is independent of the value of the
>>'link' property."
>This actually kind of makes sense, if you think of it this way:
>:link matches an element that is *semantically* a hyperlink.
And an element is *semantically* a hyperlink is defined... how? By the 
ML specification? So A ,AREA and LINK are semantic hyperlinks, but 
BLOCKQUOTE is not (based on Mozilla's implementation)?

>Another way to do this would be invent a sort of "Cascading Semantic Sheets"
>that simply reused CSS syntax to declare semantics (and perhaps typing?),
>like linking semantics, on a tree of XML, so you could declare elements with
>certain characteristics to be hyperlinks (e.g. all elements with an 'href'
>attribute), which later would trigger :link/:visited selectors in style
How about


or am I breaking rules again? This at-rule would be processed, defining 
links, so 'link' is _only_ allowed within '@link' and after that you 
could use ':link' to select them (outside the at-rule).

>Obviously all Semantic Sheets would have to be processed before any/all
>Style Sheets (similar to how a validating XML processor processes the DTD
>for the document before it does any styling).
I think that would be far to complex (not for you (and me) of course).

 Anne van Kesteren
Received on Friday, 12 March 2004 04:25:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:12 UTC