W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2006

Re: [BULK] - Re: [XHTML2] Spirit of "1.1.3. XHTML 2 and Presentation" (PR#7759)

From: Daniel Schierbeck <daniel.schierbeck@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 13:40:29 +0100
Message-ID: <43FDAD3D.3040008@gmail.com>
To: Chris Sullins <theazureshadow@gmail.com>
CC: Paul Mitchell <paul@paul-mitchell.me.uk>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>

Chris Sullins wrote:
> In my opinion, "style" makes perfect sense.
I'm not sure I agree. I do not speak English natively, so I may be wrong 
about this. I see "style" simply as colors and fonts etc. - what about 
animations? I'd much prefer "presentation", which in my mind covers more 
ground.

  <xml:presentation type="text/css">
    <![CDATA[
      body { background-color: #ABC; }
    ]]>
  </xml:presentation>

  <xml:presentation type="...">
    ... random animation language ...
  </xml:presentation>


This is of course not necessary for XML technologies such as SMIL, 
simply because they can be directly embedded into the document using 
namespaces, but I can imagine that somewhere down the road there'll be a 
need for a different approach to animations.


Cheers,
Daniel Schierbeck
Received on Thursday, 23 February 2006 12:40:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:43 GMT