- From: Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
- Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 19:35:40 -0700
- To: Adam Kuehn <akuehn@nc.rr.com>, David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>, <www-style@w3.org>
On 4/16/04 5:39 PM, "Adam Kuehn" <akuehn@nc.rr.com> wrote: > Tantek Çelik wrote: >>>> a quick question: would it make sense to allow authors to rearrange the >>>> structure of a document wit CSS? >>> >>> No. That would mean it was trying to do everything. >> >> Depending on how you interpret it, your statement is equivalent to saying it >> is wrong to do everything with XML or with UNICODE for that matter. > > Personally, I see no such equivalency. The > referent to "it" is very clearly "CSS", which > says nothing at all about XML, UNICODE, or > anything else. That's the point. You can substitute "XML" or "UNICODE" into that sentence as the "it" to see how little sense it makes as a generalization. >>> XLST is intended >>> for this sort of situation. >> >> This statement has two fundamental philosophical flaws. >> >> 1. The "one-tech" blinders. Just because there is one technology to do >> something doesn't mean there shouldn't be another. >> >> 2. The fact that complex solutions beg for simpler solutions. > > Let's assume you are correct in both. Does this > mean that it is your belief that CSS *should* > allow authors to re-arrange document structure? That question assumes binary thinking. In answer to your question, no, because that would be assuming a false dichotomy of CSS vs. anything else. There is another possibility: invent something else. Perhaps even reuse CSS syntax to build something else. Or change the question slightly. Instead of "re-arrange document structure", consider "re-arrange presentation", which is probably what the original asker of the question wanted. Now that makes sense as something to solve with CSS in a simple way. Tantek
Received on Friday, 16 April 2004 22:35:32 UTC