Re: Status of XSL and CSS?

Chris Lilley wrote:
> Aha, but that is not what you originally said.

That's fair. I was originally thinking that it might be useful to be able
to make non-anchor objects clickable. It is not unusual to need generated
text to be clickable, for example. Sometimes links can also be inferred
from the content. This is especially relevant considering that there is no
RECommended way to declare anchors today. Nevertheless, I accept that this
may all be beyond CSS's complexity curve.

> foo:link { text-decoration: underline; color: blue}
> bar:link:before {content: url(icon.png) }

"The full presentation of some HTML elements cannot be expressed in CSS2,
including replaced elements (IMG, OBJECT)."

I *do not* think that displaying images for arbitrary element type names
is beyond CSS's complexity curve!! I also think that CSS3 needs to support
text generated cross references.

As an aside, I'm not clear on why this is named :link when it is meant to
apply to anchors and not links. The prose also talks about "unvisited
links" but I think it means unvisited anchors. Those are just quibbles for
a future version, however.

 Paul Prescod  - ISOGEN Consulting Engineer speaking for only himself

By lumping computers and televisions together, as if they exerted a 
single malign influence, pessimists have tried to argue that the 
electronic revolution spells the end of the sort of literate culture 
that began with Gutenberg’s press. On several counts, that now seems 
the reverse of the truth.

Received on Sunday, 11 April 1999 17:24:49 UTC