- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 10:04:46 -0500
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- CC: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Jim Jewett <jimjjewett@gmail.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Julian Reschke wrote: >> So lets put it the other way around. Say that the CSS 1 spec would >> have looked the way it does, but it also defined the rel and name >> attributes for the <link> tag, and how they are used to link >> alternate, preferred and persistent stylesheets to HTML. Don't you >> think that someone would have said "That stuff doesn't belong in the >> CSS spec, that is HTML specific, CSS doesn't define how a specific >> markup language should link to CSS"? >> ... > > Good point. > > Funny enough, that's exactly what we have in the situation of XML and > XSLT (where the PI is described in a separate document). And funny enough, this has resulted in a situation with underdefined behavior which arises because no one seriously considered how all three things work together. Specifically, if the document being transformed has elements whose processing can cause side effects (say XHTML <script> tags) it's not clear whether those side effects should take place). That's just off the top of my head; I'm no expert on XSLT by any means. -Boris
Received on Monday, 24 November 2008 15:05:32 UTC