- From: Frank Boumphrey <bckman@ix.netcom.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 00:14:06 -0400
- To: <bert@w3.org>
- Cc: "'Style Sheet mailing list'" <www-style@w3.org>
I would like to see an <XML:STYLE></XML:STYLE> reserved element. this could be placed after the prolog and probably also after the root element. <XML:STYLE> para{ font-size:12pt; } .code{ background-color:#C0C0C0; white-space:pre; font-family:'courier new',monospace; } </XML:STYLE> Alternativley it could be a PI in the prolog <?xml:stylesheet para{ font-size:12pt; } .code{ background-color:#C0C0C0; white-space:pre; font-family:'courier new',monospace; } ?> The advantage of the former is that it could also be used as a style sheet for and XML wrapper in HTML. See http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/future/papers/boumphrey-19980419.html Frank -----Original Message----- From: Bert Bos <bbos@hyctia.inria.fr> To: www-style@w3.org <www-style@w3.org> Date: Tuesday, June 09, 1998 5:35 PM Subject: RE: Q: More complex page patterns? >Jelks Cabaniss writes: > > Håkon Lie wrote: > > > > > We foresee people using CSS if their source documents don't need > > > element reordering or other transformations before being presented > > > to the user. Vice versa, XSL will be used if element reordering or > > > other transformations are required/requested. > > > > Won't the DOM also handle element reordering? What will XSL be capable of that > > the DOM applied to CSS + (HTML | XML) can't handle? > >Yes, you should be able to use the DOM. But the difference is that to >use the DOM you need to write a program in some programming language, >while with XSL you can do most things declaratively. > >Another difference is that XSL will be a W3C speoification, while the >programming language will be specified by some other organization. But >that probably won't matter much in practice. > > > > > Also, I have seen James Clark's note for handling linked CSS stylesheets; is > > there a proposal to date for embedded and inline CSS in XML? > >Not yet, although the idea has been mentioned in the CSS working group >and some people have given it some thought. One possibility is to use >the same PI mechanism to declare attributes and elements that act like >HTML elements/attributes. The mechanisms in HTML that CSS treats >specially are: > > - the LINK element > - the STYLE element > - the STYLE attribute > - the CLASS attribute > - the ID attribute > >For example, > > <?xml:stylesheet style-attribute="layout"?> > >could declare that in the following XML element the attribute "layout" >performs the same role as the "STYLE" attribute in HTML. Of course, it >could also be an (empty) element instead of a processing instruction. > >Another idea is to use reserved names: "xml:style", "xml:class", >etc. This avoids the need for a declaration, but makes the documents >potentially less readable (because of the "xml:" prefix and because >the names are always English words). > > <xml:style> > header {text-align: center} > </xml:style> > ... > <header xml:style="font-size: x-large">...</header> > >There is possibly a link to the "namespace" idea here. > >Suggestions welcome. > > >Bert >-- > Bert Bos ( W 3 C ) http://www.w3.org/ > http://www.w3.org/people/bos/ W3C/INRIA > bert@w3.org 2004 Rt des Lucioles / BP 93 > +33 4 93 65 76 92 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France > +33 (0)4 92 38 76 92 (<--- after 5 Jan 1998) > >
Received on Wednesday, 10 June 1998 00:08:04 UTC