Re: Question about linking CSS to XML vocabularies

Hi Anne,

On Thu, 2006-12-28 at 18:54, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 19:46:29 +0100, Mike Bremford <mike-css@bfo.co.uk>  
> wrote:
> > Styling of arbitrary XML doesn't require any additional attributes to be  
> > added. The "#id" and ".class" selectors are just syntactic sugar for the  
> > attribute selectors "[id=id]" and "[class~=class]" - there is nothing  
> > special about those attributes in CSS, and they don't need to exist in  
> > your XML vocabulary.
> 
> This is partially inaccurate. #foo matches any element with an ID of  
> "foo". This is different from any element with an "id" attribute whose  
> value is "foo" (which is what you're suggesting). The same applies to the  
> class selector. Of course, this difference is quite theoretical as long as  
> you use CSS over the web (where you shouldn't use proprietary formats).

I'm not quite sure I follow what you're saying here.  I'm pretty sure
that "#id" and ".class" by default only match the xhtml:id and
xhtml:class attributes.  If I had something like myvocab:id and
myvocab:class attributes in a content model, I wouldn't expect it to
match, unless maybe you can do something with the way the namespaces are
declared in CSS that I didn't see (I need to re-read the namespaces CSS
proposal again, but I don't remember it being there).

As far as the proprietary format question, if it's a registered MIME
type like, say Atom or even something else that should be presented to a
user on the Web, it seems to me that that's what CSS was for.  Maybe I
misunderstood you.

Cheers,

ast
-- 
Andrew S. Townley <ast@atownley.org>
http://atownley.org