Re: Controling structure with CSS

Tantek Çelik wrote:
>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.

In that case, I guess you were being just a 
little too pithy for my poor, practical head.

>  >>> 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.

Well, yeah.  The original question was, "[W]ould 
it make sense to allow authors to rearrange the 
structure of a document wit[h] CSS?"  Maybe I'm 
just a literalist, but that sure looks like a 
yes/no question to me.  You appeared to be 
arguing for "yes", so I asked you to clarify, as 
I found that surprising.

>In answer to your question, no, because that would be assuming a false
>dichotomy of CSS vs. anything else.

I understand the "no" part, but you simply lose 
me with the rest of it.  The reasoning you 
proffer has nothing to do with that simple "no" 
answer.  The question doesn't assume any kind of 
dichotomy, but simply asks for an opinion about 
what CSS should or should not allow.  I think you 
are just trying too hard.  It really is a pretty 
simple question....

...which you would apparently answer "no", after 
all.  Perhaps we should leave it at that.


Received on Friday, 16 April 2004 23:17:42 UTC