Re: Another view (sorry) on XBL and behaviours

Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, Shelby Moore wrote:

>>>  * Allow individual elements to have bindings changed dynamically. 
>>You are referring to the DOM extensions of XBL.
> Not necessarily:
>    code { binding: url(code.xml#brief); }
>    code:hover { binding: url(code.xml#details); }
> This is a powerful aspect of the integration of CSS (or any binding
> language) and XBL.
> The ability to dynamically change the binding itself is also important,
> since it allows you to change the bindings of entire documents with only a
> few DOM calls.

I feel that in general, adding bindings with selectors is a good idea as 
selector syntax is very convenient.  However, it feels wrong to mix them 
with css.  It feels to me that it makes css no longer css, but something 
much more complex than the rest of the specification.  Wouldn't it be 
better to at least have a separate type for "bindings sheets", i.e. in html:
<link href="bindings.???" rel="bindings" type="text/???" />

??? because I don't know what the suffix would be called.


Dylan Schiemann

Received on Monday, 6 January 2003 19:29:29 UTC