W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > November 1997

Re: Header, Footer, and Sidebars

From: David Perrell <davidp@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 19:53:54 -0800
To: <www-style@w3.org>
Cc: <www-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <01bcfd43$93a17740$831cd9cf@davidp>

Steve Knoblock wrote:

>Are you saying that if I specify a default font-size in the included HTML
>and a default font-size in the main page, that both should adjust at the
>same time? As a matter of course?

Only if both are relative to the font-size of the UA default sylesheet. For
example, with this declaration:

  BODY { font-size: 1.1 em }    /* relative sizing */

the font size in the document should change when the UA default is changed,
regardless of whether it is the main or an included document. But with this

  BODY { font-size: 12pt }      /* absolute sizing */

it should not. If a UA is going to override an author's absolute font-size
specification, it should be as part of a 'magnification' process that
resizes all elements.

>I'm looking at it from a practical viewpoint, looking to avoid hacks like
>frames and finicky server side includes. I'd be happy to see some other way
>to better accomplish the same thing than using OBJECT if needed.

I don't understand in what ways SSI is more finicky than CSI. The
proxy/caching problem is worse with CSI, since you might wind up with a
composite document with unmatched parts.

>Does the document have to be a full HTML document? Could the included
>document be an HTML fragment, as with SSI now?

Well, besides more practical reasons noted by Albert Lunde, the element name
implies a single entity.

David Perrell
Received on Saturday, 29 November 1997 22:54:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:26:45 UTC