W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > May 2007

Re: 'role' should be property

From: Dmitry Turin <html60@narod.ru>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 10:16:45 +0400
Message-ID: <108598429.20070530101645@narod.ru>
To: public-html@w3.org

Good day, all.


PHL> Apart from the fact that CSS stands for Cascading *Style Sheets*
PHL> "Cascading Style Sheets (CSS) is a simple mechanism for adding style 

Your thinking don't contain category of time:
you mess up "is for" and "will be for".
The last is not obligatory.

MS> idea goes against 4.3. http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#pci
MS> "Some data formats are designed to describe presentation...
MS> these data formats should only address presentation issues."

This demand is anachronism,
first, since _behaviour, binding, pronouncing_ are already specified in it;
second, since sense has appeared to abolish it.

MB>> And there is also no reason that some non-presentational
MB>> properties couldn't be defined.
PHL> Then the name Cascading Style Sheets wouldn't be descriptive of the
PHL> actual language anymore, no?
PTW> Isn't the reason simply that CSS = "Cascading Style Sheets"

  You argue against long-term (long-time) comfort by single name -
it's not seriously.
  If deal is only in psychological inertia,
let's decrypt abbreviation CSS in other way
(CSS already needs new decryption,
since behaviour, binding, pronouncing are specified in it).

JR> Next is that somebody suggests just throwing all the semantically 
JR> interesting stuff into an external RDF document and to link to it.

Keep in mind, that i don't want to offend you,
but this way has name "lady's argument" in theory of discuss (this theory exists).
It means, that you land down my argument into absurdity,
and than you bring characteristics of absurdity to actual question.

Dmitry Turin
Received on Thursday, 31 May 2007 08:02:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:44:13 UTC