- From: Herr Christian Wolfgang Hujer <Christian.Hujer@itcqis.com>
- Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 03:47:11 +0100
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Hello Ian, dear list members, Am Montag, 6. Januar 2003 18:04 schrieb Ian Hickson: > As you say, we (including myself) don't have enough experience to be > sure of anything here. However, I personally find that "Behaviour" is > more towards the Presentation side of your layer model than the > others. I agree. If the behaviour of a form is behaviour, it's somehow also related to semantics, not just style, so yes, I would not consider behaviour to be presentational only. > > I consider the a element of (X)HTML implying some behaviour. > Is there any programmatic behaviour of an <a> element that is > guarenteed to always be wanted? > > I'm not sure there is. For example, I can't think of any similarity > between the behaviour of hyperlinks in Lynx and in Qube, except > changing the "location.href", and even that isn't guarenteed to be > always the case, for example I often open links in new tabs. I don't know Qube. What is it? I think opening a link in a new tab is altering the default object of the defaut behaviour by replacing the window/frame object with a newly created one. I consider the behaviour of a href for user agents (simply, unqualified activation) and for spiders to be the same. That the spider threads is not part of the behavioural definition of a href but part of the behaviour of the spider. So I think an interface between the behaviour and the user agent is required which takes arguments for the invocation of the method. I think a href has a behaviour that effectivly consists of three steps: The behaviour requesting the object from the user agent. (That makes it possible for a spider or a tabbed browser to thread / tab) The user agent creating and delivering the object. The behaviour invoking the desired method or altering the desired attributes of that object. With such a picture in mind, could we agree on "a href" having a behaviour? > > I also consider most or all of the elements of XSLT implying some > > behaviour. > > True, but they aren't presentational, so it's a rather different kind > of "behaviour" (not one which XBL is targetted for, I mean). Yes, XSLT has behaviour but it's completely unpresentational and, as far as I know, cannot be exprressed in XBL. Which creates an idea in my mind, a behaviour specification language that is capable of specifying how XSLT works. But that's just a weird idea. > Basically, my point is that while I agree with you that Behaviour is > something that crosses several of the levels, it seems to me that the > parts of Behaviour that XBL addresses are most closely associated with > the Presentation layer. Yes. Cheers -- ITCQIS GmbH Christian Wolfgang Hujer Geschäftsführender Gesellschafter Telefon: +49 (0)89 27 37 04 37 Telefax: +49 (0)89 27 37 04 39 E-Mail: Christian.Hujer@itcqis.com WWW: http://www.itcqis.com/
Received on Monday, 6 January 2003 21:47:54 UTC