W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 2005

Re: New layout language.

From: Laurens Holst <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl>
Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2005 21:35:42 +0200
Message-ID: <42CC328E.1030203@students.cs.uu.nl>
To: Orion Adrian <orion.adrian@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style@w3.org

Orion Adrian wrote:

>>Hear hear ^_^.
>>
>>I entirely agree. And I think it would be more constructive if we took
>>the discussion towards improving what is still lacking in the existing
>>model.
>>    
>>
>How so? Why not move in a direction that would increase what you could
>do with the system and not just how it looks?
>  
>
There is a standardised role="navigation" attribute in XHTML 2.0 
(alongside ‘main’, ‘secondary’, ‘banner’ and more, a list which will 
likely expand before it is finished) which specifies the role of a 
section in a document, and you can perfectly well select on that with 
*[role=navigation] { position: whatever }.

As long as page authors use those role attributes (which I think they 
will), you can write a user style sheet which overrides any page layout 
on those sections, and position everything exactly how you want it.

>Separation of layout and formatting and separation of content from
>interface improves gives you capabilities you simply can't have with
>them together.
>
I *really* don’t see which additional capabilities that gives. It is 
just syntax.

>Why are people so against the split?
>  
>
Because it’s pointless and because inventing a new language for every 
‘problem’ is not a solution.


~Grauw

-- 
Ushiko-san! Kimi wa doushite, Ushiko-san!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Laurens Holst, student, university of Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Website: www.grauw.nl. Backbase employee; www.backbase.com.
Received on Wednesday, 6 July 2005 19:35:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:39 GMT