- From: John Lewis <lewi0371@mrs.umn.edu>
- Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 07:11:48 -0600
- To: www-style@w3.org
Shelby wrote on Thursday, January 2, 2003 at 11:11:15 PM: > At 06:24 PM 1/2/2003 -0600, John Lewis wrote: >> >>>>> Shelby Moore wrote: >>>>> CSS selectors allows one to select elements of markup based on >>>>> attributes which are not related to *semantics*. >>>> >>>> Ian Hickson responded: >>>> As an editor of the W3C Selectors Specification, I assure you, >>>> that is most definitely not the intention of CSS selectors. >> >>> Ian's "assurance" was false. >> >> If you revised your original statement to "CSS selectors match >> elements without regard to the elements' semantics," > That is equivalent to what I had written above. As long as your original statement says "attributes," I disagree with it. I agree with the statement I wrote, which is what I think you meant to say, but which has a completely different meaning than your original statement. > Thank you! Thus CSS is orthogonal to markup. That is what I have > been saying all along, even though Ian Hickson disagreed with that > as quoted above. I agree with what Ian wrote above, and I don't think it's inconsistent with the revised statement. > And XBL allows one to extend markup with new tags. Yet XBL also > combines CSS and DOM dependencies in its syntax. So I hope you > understand that XBL will make CSS and DOM dependent on markup. Assuming for a second that XBL depends on CSS, how does that make *CSS* dependent on markup? Note that I don't care if XBL is dependent on anything because I don't know or use XBL. What I want to know is how XBL's dependencies affect CSS's dependencies. -- John
Received on Friday, 3 January 2003 08:11:51 UTC