- From: Paul Mitchell <paul@paul-mitchell.me.uk>
- Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 22:23:39 +0000
- To: www-style@w3.org
Bert Bos wrote: >On Saturday 11 February 2006 21:50, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > > >>Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: >> >> >>>* Boris Zbarsky wrote: >>> >>> >>>>><?xml-stylesheet href="#xxx" type="text/css"?> >>>>> >>>>> >So the current situation is still that there is no spec and you can't >expect fragment identifiers to work, except in the special case of an >XSL style sheet embedded in an XML document. Any other kind of style >sheet embedded in any other kind of document is unlikely to work and >may some day even be forbidden. > > If the problem could be solved, it would have been solved by now. Embedded stylesheets require datastream-oriented UAs to behave irrationally, and makes coding difficult. If the webgov cannot stomach prohibiting this hideous idea, at least strongly discourage it by deprecation. >I've updated the text[1] with an overview of the unsolved problems. > >[1] http://www.w3.org/Style/styling-XML#Embedded >[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-stylesheet > > You cover the many issues well, but I have a style criticism. There's not enough fire and brimstone for the non-techies. Don't be coy. When you say "<strong>As of February 2006, there are still technical problems with this and no formal specification exists</strong>", I'd follow with a translation, which is something like "<h1><blink>IN OTHER WORDS, THIS IS WRONG, HORRIBLY HORRIBLY WRONG! DO THIS AND YOU'LL GET HELL! DON'T SAY YOU WEREN'T WARNED!</blink></h1>". But that's just me. Good thing your page isn't a wiki. :) -- Paul Mitchell www.paul-mitchell.me.uk
Received on Monday, 13 February 2006 22:25:56 UTC