- From: Noah Scales <noahjscales@yahoo.com>
- Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 06:13:11 -0800 (PST)
- To: www-style@w3.org
Hello, Mr. Baron. In response to the XSL working group, you point out: "Selectors have been optimized for testing a single HTML or XML element against a set of selectors rather than testing a single selector against a set of elements; this type of use is expected to be usable in performance-critical code, even when performed frequently." Mozilla allows XSLT to create an internal view (If I understand the STTS 3 meaning of "internal view") of an arbitrary source XML document styled with CSS. You could add css:style attributes to the internal view's styled elements, but more likely you output selectors from your XSLT transformation to add style to your XML source document, unless the output format is XHTML. You can't style arbitrary XML without CSS + CSS Selectors, unless you use the CSS namespace, or you think XHTML is arbitrary XML(like I do). Or the CSS working group decides on (a limited form of) XPATH as their selector language. CSS functions like attr() (and content()?) combined with selectors provide transformations. Transformations to an internal view, something that XSL can do as well. But without the CSS namespace, XSLT really CAN'T style XML without using CSS Selectors. Embedded CSS in an XML document has to use CSS Selectors. Since that's true, does CSS + Selectors = CSS + STTS? Your working group could decide so. After all, why use XPATH+XSLT+Selectors+CSS when you can use Selectors+CSS? Maybe that's what coders think. Why use the performance-dragging when you can use the performance-critical? Maybe that's what browser vendors think. Why use XML+CSS when you can use XHTML+CSS? That's what some CSS working group members think. So you all won't decide on a CSS namespace and/or XPATH selector syntax, and CSS Selectors -> Selectors -> STTS -> ... There are some deeper issues here, about what the future web should look like, maybe. OK, maybe I'm getting carried away, maybe. Still, if the CSS working group decides to keep developing a selector language that is performance-critical, then how about an XML version of CSS Selectors that's performance- critical right now? Can you describe what it does and doesn't do? Your answer about matching an element to selectors instead of a selector to elements is a bit vague. Can you give it some context? You could help me use XSLT in a way that operates more efficiently with major browsers. -Noah __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Received on Sunday, 29 January 2006 14:13:13 UTC