Re: Wrapping up the ACSS Module Ideas

> > > 1. In the content, include a "skip" link that points to just after the
> > >    navigation bar. Then, in the CSS stylesheet, hide that link for
visual
> > >    browsers.
> >
> > This would appear to be the *only* ideal solution.
>
> Actually it's not ideal. It is, IMHO, about style, but you must include
> extra content. Any solution that requires this should set alarm bells
> ringing.
Yes, I am always opposed to such "hacks" as well, and that's why I wrote
would "appear" to be - because it isn't!
The original purpose of this ACSS style proposition was that it provides

> > > 2. Aural browsers could implement a feature whereby saying "skip"
> > >    automatically jumps to the end of the current (deepest) element, or
> > >    jump to the end of the element that contains the end of the current
> > >    sentence, or some such.
> >
> > That wouldn't work because the DOM is often messy.
>
> Mm. The problem is perhaps that HTML elements are exceedingly
> primitive: <table> encompasses an enormous number of different types of
> content. Obviously you can't specify meaning in CSS (e.g., defining
> TABLE {meaning: navigation}), so the only way from a presentational
> point of view is, as you suggested, to define the element's
> presentational level (e.g., presentation-level: optional | integral |
> never), and then decide what you want to do with it from this.

I'm glad you get it. I can't see how people can think this is best solved
using structure rather than style. I think that is the main reason that the
CSS & FP WG aren't so keen on the idea; but at least all of this discussion
may go towards saving the ACSS module...
If this proposal for "optional content" *eventually* gets put into CSS3,
would you use in on richinstyle.com? Actually, I think I remember you saying
you would - good for you! I'll certainly be using it on waptechinfo.com and
mysterylights.com etc.
'presentation-level' is a excellent alternative to 'play', because it is non
media specific.
Another feature of style is that it is backwards compatable. You can't use
XLink hacks etc. in XHTML 1.0, beacuse it doesn't support XLink. But CSS
applies to any version of HTML, and XML - am I right?
If so, then it means this proposal can be used on any current site, not
reliant upon future technologies...

> > > 3. The content could be transformed using XSLT to include a skip link
if
> > >  the media is aural.
> >
> > But for that you would have to use CC/PP or some kind of scripting
(ASP),
>
> Nooooooooooooooooooo. OT, but if you think ASP is the only web
> scripting language you are wrong. Use PHP (http://www.php.net) - not
> BASIC crap (uses C++/Perl-style syntax), faster, cross-platform, Free,
> support for pdf, gif, png, DOM, node-based XML (expat), flash, etc.
> It's also object-oriented (if you want). Repent before BASIC rots your
> mind :->.

Actually, I use PHP3 quite a lot. It's easier to use than ASP, and tends to
work more often than not, first time! Doesn't work with XML as well as ASP
though...

Thank you for your support!

Kindest Regards,
Sean B. Palmer
WAP Tech Info - http://www.waptechinfo.com/

Received on Wednesday, 18 October 2000 07:43:54 UTC