- From: Giuseppe Bilotta <giuseppe.bilotta@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 08:13:15 +0200
- To: www-style@w3.org
- Cc: Kelly <lightsolphoenix@gmail.com>, "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
[Ahem, sorry Boris, I sent you by mistake a preliminary version of this email. Please discard it] On 8/21/06, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote: > > Implementing a parent selector involves knowing all the children of an element > by the time you're ready to style it. Hence the incremental load problems. IANAI (I Am Not An Implementor), but I don't really see how this is any different from having to know the entire content of the element before rendering it. And by judging from what I see in Opera or Mozilla, dynamic/progressive restyling is not really a problem, just like dynamic/progressive content addition isn't. (I rarely if ever use Internet Explorer, so I cannot discuss its functionality, especially for IE7) You want an example? Head over to my blog: http://oblomov.ilcannocchiale.it : due to the very strong limitations of the blog platform I'm using, I've had to implement my own style by doing an enormous amount of element juggling with JS: and *after* all the juggling is done I add a <style>...</style> element to my document with all the CSS I'm interested in ... and *poof* the page gets rendered correctly. Even without considering these extreme cases, a lot of complex pages with no JS code require some rendering box shuffling and restyling *while loading*, and both Opera and SeaMonkey seem to handle them pretty well. So please help me get something right: Opera and SeaMonkey already handle similar situations (and the other stuff is really not any different). Plus, as Allan Sandfeld Jensen mentions: > Not really. It would only take me a few hours to implement it in KHTML. A 40 > line recursive function could do it. The dynamic restyling framework I wrote > to correctly track the current child to parent or uncle relationships can > easily track cousin to cousin relationships as well. so I guess Konqueror would not have any problem with that either. So not only I still don't see the validity of such an objection on a purely technical reaso. Even worse, I don't understand /who/ is objecting, given what Allan Sandfeld Jensen says and that Opera and Mozilla SeaMonkey already seem to handle current dynamic/progressive (re)styling rather well ... are they complaining about there being /more/ need for it? Who else is left? -- Giuseppe "Oblomov" Bilotta
Received on Monday, 21 August 2006 06:13:29 UTC