- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 01:29:51 +0100
- To: "Nikhil Kothari" <nikhilko@microsoft.com>, "public-html-comments@w3.org" <public-html-comments@w3.org>
On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 01:14:21 +0100, Nikhil Kothari <nikhilko@microsoft.com> wrote: > 1. Why is it yet another spec? I think there is value in having one > over-arching spec representing the HTML and DOM platforms. The way I see > it, extensibility is a core feature, and shouldn't have to be pieced > together from different specs coming together. Well, what XBL provides is pretty different from HTML. XBL sits more on the presentation "layer" and allows for creation of components, etc. where HTML provides a set of native controls. XBL is also not just for HTML, SVG and other languages can use it as well. > 2. I haven't looked at the spec deeply, but a glance at the TOC > seems to imply its still missing things like ability to define custom > layouts and to write components that deeply integrate in the core DOM > infrastructure. Layout is left to CSS (mostly), but writing components is definitely possible and they do in fact integrate with the DOM, etc. -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Sunday, 27 January 2008 00:26:02 UTC