- From: Scott Bigham <dsb@goldfinch.cs.duke.edu>
- Date: Fri, 8 Sep 1995 11:24:09 -0400
- To: www-style@w3.org
>- There has not been much public disussion on the latest CSS >draft. [...] Oh? Well, there are a few comments I've been meaning to make, so if the list will indulge me, I'll take this opportunity. > - add support for user-selectable multiple style sheets through the > TITLE attribute of the LINK element. Turning on/off various style > sheets should be under the interactive control of the user. My main interest in multiple style sheets is that in the potential eventuality of multiple co-existing style sheet notations (which we now have, sort of, with the two existing versions of the CSS draft), page authors might write the same style information in multiple notations for maximum coverage. It might be useful in that event to have a way to tell the rendering agent that "These three <LINK REL=STYLE>'s all contain the same information; once you've successfully parsed one of them, you can ignore the others." It might also be useful to be able to identify the style sheet's notation in the <LINK> so that the rendering agent could easily skip style sheets in notations it couldn't parse. This also suggests the possibility of multiple <STYLE> blocks. The main problem I see there (and this is drifting somewhat off charter) is that the value of the <STYLE NOTATION> attribute is apparently restricted to the values listed in the DTD. This seems counter-intuitive to me; instead of trying to parse the style sheet at the SGML level, it seems that the right thing to do would be to give the NOTATION parameter the type CDATA and treat the contents of <STYLE>...</STYLE> as raw #PCDATA, and let the rendering agent figure it out. > - remove the support for addressing based on element attributes > from level 1. Support for CLASS remains and one can address "new" > and "old" anchors using pseudo-clases, e.g.: > > A.link: text-color = red > A.vlink: text-color = pink -- visited link > A.alink: text-color = blue -- active link > > The pseudo-classes only applies to A with an HREF. Hmm. Might me not want to specify, for instance, the column spacing for a <UL COMPACT>? I suppose you could get the same effect with a class, though. > Comments? There are a few worries about the grammar in the CSS draft that I noticed while trying to put together an equivalent yacc grammar. Particularly worrying is the rule that covers addressing patterns: context: predecessor [ ancestor ancestor* context ]?; which seems to require not only that one cannot have two adjacent sequential search patterns (for instance, `/H1/ /P/ P' to catch the second paragraph after an <H1>), but that the first and last search patterns must be sequential. Why not the more straightforward: context: [ predecessor | ancestor ]* ? -sbigham
Received on Friday, 8 September 1995 11:27:48 UTC