- From: Anne van Kesteren (fora) <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
- Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 10:18:01 +0100
- To: Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, www-style@w3.org
Tantek Çelik wrote: >On 3/11/04 10:26 AM, "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU> wrote: > >>That was merely a proposal to resolve the logical contradiction. The precise >>proposal was "Whether :link matches or not is independent of the value of the >>'link' property." >> >This actually kind of makes sense, if you think of it this way: > >:link matches an element that is *semantically* a hyperlink. > And an element is *semantically* a hyperlink is defined... how? By the ML specification? So A ,AREA and LINK are semantic hyperlinks, but BLOCKQUOTE is not (based on Mozilla's implementation)? >Another way to do this would be invent a sort of "Cascading Semantic Sheets" >that simply reused CSS syntax to declare semantics (and perhaps typing?), >like linking semantics, on a tree of XML, so you could declare elements with >certain characteristics to be hyperlinks (e.g. all elements with an 'href' >attribute), which later would trigger :link/:visited selectors in style >sheets. > How about @link{ a[href]{ link:url(href); } } or am I breaking rules again? This at-rule would be processed, defining links, so 'link' is _only_ allowed within '@link' and after that you could use ':link' to select them (outside the at-rule). >Obviously all Semantic Sheets would have to be processed before any/all >Style Sheets (similar to how a validating XML processor processes the DTD >for the document before it does any styling). > I think that would be far to complex (not for you (and me) of course). -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/>
Received on Friday, 12 March 2004 04:25:00 UTC