Daniel Glazman wrote: > That's a neat idea, but, again, I think the path opened by MSIE **SEVEN** > years ago was a good one. And because I think (a) this is not > presentational > but behavioral (b) this is not only for HTML, I believe we should have an > xml:editable attribute. The downside of an attribute is getting multiple views of the same document, one editable, one not (or further, with different parts editable). And I doubt that it would be possible to argue for putting it in the XML namespace. > If this happens to be impossible for almost religious reasons, then I > _could_ live with such a solution but it would be quite bad design, IMHO. I think attaching it using selectors or XPath is great -- they don't have to be limited to style. Making it a CSS property is another question and I agree it shouldn't be there. -- Robin Berjon Senior Research Scientist Expway, http://expway.com/Received on Friday, 30 September 2005 09:57:11 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:40 GMT