- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 21:39:10 -0700
- To: "David Hyatt" <hyatt@apple.com>, "Lachlan Hunt" <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- Cc: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, www-style@w3.org, dev-tech-xbl@mozilla.org
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 20:33:45 -0700, David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com> wrote:
> IMO the binding property is simple and well-specified. I don't really
> see a need for additional complexity in the CSS syntax.
Note that he's proposing an additional feature, as I understand it. I
suppose that doing @binding url() will load the binding document and than
for each binding associate it with the element given in element=""
attribute.
> dave
>
> On Aug 16, 2006, at 8:26 PM, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
>
>>
>> fantasai wrote:
>>> I don't mind putting these bindings in a text/css file, but I would
>>> like to see them explicitly separated out from the rest of the CSS
>>> rules, perhaps in an @rule that is always placed before any regular
>>> CSS rules.
>>> @import "foo";
>>> @bindings {
>>> input.special { binding: url("mybinding"); }
>>> }
>>
>> I somewhat agree with Ian that this adds too much complexity, but it
>> has given me an idea.
>>
>> It would be useful to be able to import bindings from CSS, much like
>> the <?xbl?> PI does. The benefit of this would be that, unlike the PI,
>> it could be used in HTML. Presently, the only way to import a binding
>> into HTML is to call document.loadBindingDocument(...); in a script.
>>
>> What about using this?
>>
>> @binding url(/binding/example.xbl);
>> @binding "/binding/example.xbl"
>>
>> Or perhaps just extending @import to support importing bindings.
>>
>> --Lachlan Hunt
>> http://lachy.id.au/
>>
>
--
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Thursday, 17 August 2006 04:39:22 UTC