- From: Jeffrey Yasskin <jyasskin@hotmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 18:50:41 -0500
- To: www-style@w3.org
>From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> >Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 22:05:18 +0200 > >* Jeffrey Yasskin wrote: > >And how do you attach these events to the XML elements? > >That's a problem for the relevant markup language. If you really want a >generic method (and I can't see any good reason why there should be >such) introduce something similar to <?xml-stylesheet ... ?> for scripts >and not abuse CSS for this purpose. > I maintain that this is not CSS-abuse. An <?xml-script ... ?> PI would work for attaching events to an XML document using the DOM Events Rec, but I don't think it's the best way. See below. > >The same could have been said about basic CSS when it was released. No > >browsers had CSS support, and using pure CSS meant your pages looked > >horrible in plain HTML browsers. > >If they were horribly marked up, possibly, but pages didn't break >without CSS support. And they shouldn't break without JavaScript. > > >Should CSS not have been developed for this reason? > >You want to require support for _two_ supplemental technologies to make >use of _one_ supplemental technologie, that's nonsense. Not require. The old methods of attaching JavaScript to HTML will still work. If an author chooses to make it easier on him/herself by using behaviors, they assume the risk that some browsers will not support it, just as by using pure CSS, they assume the same risk. > > >In HTML, will that addEventListener be in the onload event? > >Please read the DOM Level 2 Events recommendation. I did. It doesn't address where you should call the addEventListener method. I believe that most event registration will be done onLoad. I ask again: If it runs every time the page loads, why shouldn't it be declarative instead of programmatic? There are (at least) two ways to transform XML documents: SAX (programmatic) and XSLT(declarative). XSLT is much easier to write, but if you need more flexibility, you use SAX. I think the same type of arrangement should be made with events. > > >JavaScript is more concerned with the appearance and behavior of > >a page than it is with the content. > >As is CSS. So why is adding scripting support, which is mostly concerned with the appearance and behavior of a page, an abuse of CSS, which is mostly concerned with the appearance and behavior of a page? I believe, and I may be alone on this, that the true test of when CSS is a completely functional language is when it can be used to take an arbitrary XML grammar and make it as powerful as HTML. I should be able to make up a set of XML tags and, after linking it to a CSS stylesheet, make it do anything an HTML 4 page can do. At the moment, I can't, and I won't be able to until scripting support is added to XML. Jeffrey Yasskin _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Received on Thursday, 2 August 2001 19:51:18 UTC