- From: White Lynx <whitelynx@operamail.com>
- Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2005 18:09:12 +0400
- To: www-style@w3.org
> but using CSS for linking is an easy way to implement > support for these type of documents in any CSS supporting > browser. I guess DOM+EcmaScript could also be used Yes DOM can be used but I think this the case style language is more appropriate. From one hand it is flexible enough and from another hand it allows users to address their needs via user style sheet (user script is les convenient as it intereacts with author scripts in very nontrivial way). > The attr() parameter in links can be debated about. > Question is whether it should be in CSS (a presentation > language) or something like XBL (a behavioural language) The first is much more convenient then the last. > Think about an XHTML document, if you take the CSS away it > looks different but everything still works. Everything works (sometimes) thanks to browser's default style sheet or alternative formatting mechanism. Browser can't support all markup languages, but for some of them native support can be effectively replaced with browser default style sheet or even author style sheet. Adding linking extensions would give more power to browser style sheets as well, and would allow browsers to afford many markup languages without wasting resources on implementing each of them separately. Arguments like XHTML is the only one markup language does not sound as we know it is not the only and the web is not the only place where CSS is used. > All in all, I think my current opinion is that I’m fine > with links in CSS as UA extensions, but I would rather not > have it in the standard > Because as mentioned before, the XML then becomes > *dependant* on CSS I don't see how blocking CSS linking extensions improves situation. In first case you need CSS (one style language) to display many markup languages in second case you need many markup languages to be supported natively that will never happen (especially in browsers that proved their inability to implement any single markup language properly). > Anyways, at some point in this discussion I recall I saw > something mentioned like ‘link: "http://example.com";’, > which is of course clearly > wrong, as the link itself should be part of the content, > not the presentation. How about link attached to comment or explanation added via CSS generated content to make document more accessible? > But is it the role of CSS to define the *behaviour* of a > user agent when it encounters those hundreds of elements? How browser should guess what to do with all these elements? Style sheet is basically letter to browser that says: /* Dear browser, Please treat all these stuff as follows (style sheet attached below), Sincerely yours, Page Author */ What's wrong if browser wants to know how to represent hyperlinks and how to identify them? -- _______________________________________________ Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way: Download Opera 8 at http://www.opera.com Powered by Outblaze
Received on Friday, 23 September 2005 14:09:27 UTC