Re: XBL is (mostly) W3C redundant, and CSS is wrong W3C layer for semantic behavior *markup*

[...]

>This seems to be the sentence you're talking about [1]:
>  "CSS selectors allows one to select elements of markup
>   based on attributes which are not related to *semantics*."


Yes.  And it is grammatically correct.  Perhaps English is not your native
language.  My sentence above says that CSS selectors allow selection of
markup elements based on (i.e. using) attributes which are not related to
semantics.

I think the ONLY attribute that can be inferred from that is class
attribute of markup elements.


>
>Nowhere does "CSS attribute" appear in that sentence.


I never said it did.  I said that perhaps that was how Ian interpreted it.


>*Nowhere* do I see any sentence that equates 'CSS attribute'
>with 'class attribute'.


Never said I did.


> I only see a sentence in which you
>erroneously substitute 'CSS attribute' for 'CSS property':


I was not the first person to write about attributes of CSS.  I preferred
to use the word "property".


>  "In any case, I explained that even CSS attributes (e.g.
>   font of paragraph) do not deal with semantics."


I was responding to Ian's sentence which had the word "attribute" in it to
describe CSS properties (or at least that was how I interpreted his
response), so I decided to use his terminology in interests of preventing
digressive discussion like this!


>[1] In actuality, CSS allows one to select elements of
>      markup based on both attributes which are and attributes
>      which are not related to semantics.

I assume you refer to tag selection.

My statement:

>  "CSS selectors allows one to select elements of markup
>   based on attributes which are not related to *semantics*."

did not exclude that case.

-Shelby Moore

Received on Friday, 3 January 2003 16:33:14 UTC