- From: Matthew Raymond <mattraymond@earthlink.net>
- Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2006 07:36:36 -0500
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote: > Leons Petrazickis wrote: >> I think what's wanted is a Cascading Semantics Language. > > I'm baffled. Why do we want this? What would it allow us to do? There are people who posted ideas about semantic properties for CSS on the www-style mailing list. They would likely be ecstatic about turning CSS into a cascading semantics language. Personally, this would be a greater nightmare than the |role| attribute. However, global attributes like |role| aren't much better. Attributes should specify the details of semantics that elements already possess. For example, |type| on an <input> element specifies the type of input. One of the example of the |role| attribute shows how you can provide values like "checkbox" to elements like <span>. I can understand assigning values such as these to DHTML container elements for accessibility purposes (and that might be a legitimate reason to create something like a global "accessrole" attribute or something similar), but |role| does not define any such limitations. Generally, though, this is just math. For every attribute or role you have that can apply to ALL elements, you have the semantics of all those elements to interact with, plus you have interactions between an indefinite number of global attributes that may be defined on that element. Without some sort of scope limitation, you can't possible define how the semantics of everything interacts. Think about the conversation regarding how simple nested elements in HTML interact with their parents and increase the complexity by several orders of magnitude.
Received on Friday, 22 December 2006 04:36:36 UTC