- From: Shelby Moore <shelby@coolpage.com>
- Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 12:04:39 -0500 (EST)
- To: www-style@w3.org
Patrick H. Lauke wrote: > The implementation doesn't say it's a list of <a>s, though. It says it's > a <select> which it will present to the user as a list of > <a>s...fundamentally, still a select. Possibly an very subtle > difference, but a difference nonetheless. You've convinced me! If XBL specifies that it's semantic transformations are excluded from Semantic Web, then it has a license to obscure, and I can't complain, because there is no requirement to map it back to the Semantic Web. The interoperability requirements cease to exist, because it would be agreed that obscurity of semantics is desireable. So is that a concensus way out of this impass? But I caution that the tradeoffs of _SEMANTIC_ obscurity should be weighed. Especially when we can do behavioral styling with XSLT without obscurity for semantics. What's the benefit? Selectors and Cascade? Note you also conflate normative style with scripted style (a style sheet is monolithic). -- Kind Regards, Shelby Moore http://coolpage.com
Received on Saturday, 26 November 2005 17:04:58 UTC