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

Re: [CSS21] Please endorse xml:id

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 00:37:08 +0000 (UTC)
To: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0506250008090.2567@dhalsim.dreamhost.com>

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005, Norman Walsh wrote:
> 
> I think it would be of benefit to the community if the CSS 2.1 draft 
> suggested that implementations of CSS 2.1 applied to XML documents 
> <rfc2119>should</rfc2119> support the xml:id specification.

It's not appropriate for a spec to take positions on other technologies. 
Technologies should succeed or fail on their own merits, not because they 
were dragged kicking and screaming into implementations by virtue of other 
specs requiring them.

CSS doesn't require particular graphics, video, or audio formats; it 
doesn't require the DOM or any particular scripting environment; it 
doesn't require the CSSOM; it doesn't even require XML or HTML. Which is 
perfectly sensible, since CSS is orthogonal from both and can be applied 
to any tree-based system. I believe the only technologies that CSS 
requires are UTF-8 and the Unicode Bidi algorithm -- the former is 
required because you have to represent CSS in _some_ common form if you 
want interoperability, and the second is required because CSS supports 
bidi layout and thus has to reference some bidi algorithm (or invent its 
own, which seems suboptimal).

Given the above, it would be very strange indeed for xml:id support to be 
required. Why not, say, xml:base? Or XInclude? Or XHTML, XForms, XFrames?

In any case, it makes no difference what we require. Implementators ignore 
this kind of requirement if it isn't in line with what they want to 
implement. To exit CR we need to show two interoperable implementations; 
we'd just end up dropping any requirement like this that wasn't met. And 
that begs the question: why have such requirements in the first place?

IMHO.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Saturday, 25 June 2005 00:37:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:37 GMT