Re: CSS 4?

On 10/29/03 2:34 PM, "Dylan Schiemann" <> wrote:

>> text/css, on the other hand, should only be used for styling.
> So presumably other purposes can defined their own text/foo , and DOM 3
> CSS could have a getElementsBySelector interface.

Or perhaps something which used CSS for such procedural applications could
use application/css instead.

>>> I'm not convinced that I'm right either.  I just feel that the lines of
>>> style and structure are being blurred.
>> Oh, they are, there's no doubt about that. But BECSS is not the start of
>> the blur, it's merely that because it involves scripting, people suddenly
>> become more skeptical that it can be used for styling.
>> It is quite easy to show pure CSS1 being used in non-stylistic ways. It is
>> even easier with CSS2. As you add more power to the language, it becomes
>> easier to abuse it.
>> But this is the case with any technology. The key is to see whether the
>> technology can be used correctly, and whether that is the use that has
>> been optimised (i.e. is it easier to do the right thing or the wrong
>> thing). I think with the BECSS proposal (the XBL-like version that hasn't
>> been published yet) that it is indeed easier to do the right thing.
> Whether it is true or not, css is generally perceiveded to be "safe".

Strongly agreed.

I think a major component of this perceived safety is the purely declarative
nature (e.g. nothing procedural) of CSS.  While this doesn't avoid all
problems, it certainly avoids huge categories of problems that bedevil
procedural/DOM based solutions.

I'm beginning to agree with things that Bert has said in the past about
keeping CSS simple and safe.

While behavior may be presentational (Ian's litmus test is a good one), it
is not clear to me that CSS by itself should attempt to solve all
presentational problems.

> I'd hate to see css be thought of like JavaScript and disabled in a
> significant percentage of browsers.

Strongly agreed again.

I'm beginning to think more and more that anything sent as part of
"text/css" should neither be procedural nor be specified as expected to
support embedding/referencing/binding to something procedural.


Received on Wednesday, 29 October 2003 19:15:20 UTC