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

At 11:44 PM 1/5/2003 +0100, Rijk van Geijtenbeek wrote:

>Forgive for mingling here,

Please do.  We need more reasonable (open minded) people involved in thread
so we can reach truth quicker.

>but I'd like to know what you (or others) think 
>of, for example, this:
>h1 {font-size: medium; font-weight: normal;}
>i {font-style: normal;}
>Doesn't this prove that the parts of CSS that are required for a conforming 
>CSS UA can be used to create a non-conforming presentation of an HTML 
>document? [1]

No.  Because you haven't violated the semantics as specificied by HTML
4.01.  No where does HTML 4.01 say what font size a header must have.

However, if you instead used the CSS "display" property to change a <li>
into a <table> element, then you would be creating non-conforming
semantics.  This is why the "display" property is "not required by HTML
conforming user agents"[1].

That gives you two CSS examples to show how to separate "presentation" from
"non-comforming semantic implementation" per my definition[2].

>I haven't studied XBL at all, and I'm suspicious of efforts to mix behavior 
>and content and presentation.

Yes I agree.  Mixing "presentation" and "non-comforming semantic
implementation" in inseparable ways will have some bad effects.

> But I'm even more suspicious of efforts that 
>promote sending generic XML over the net for general purpose documents.

If I markup all the dates in my document using a custom tag <mydates>, it
doesn't cause any harm.  Existing conforming UAs can ignore it.  UAs which
understand my tags can use the additional information.

Do not be so afraid.  It is a benign and powerfull mechanism which is badly
needed.  It will not diminish the importance of CSS (style), because
"presentation" should not be in the same layer as "non-comforming semantic

> If 
>a document *needs* CSS and/or XBL and/or XSTL to be supported by the UA 
>before it is usable in that UA in any way, than it has failed to be a good 
>WWW document.

Agreed!  But custom markup with proper separation of layers will not be so
brittle.  But improper merging of layers will make your worst fears come true.

You should actually be supporting my argument (you will eventually come to




-Shelby Moore

Received on Sunday, 5 January 2003 18:15:18 UTC