jim.ley at gmail.com
Thu Jul 1 01:32:23 PDT 2004
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 19:45:55 +0000 (UTC), Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:
> Anyway, both models are supported in the spec now, so we'll see what the
> market decides.
Ah right, let the market decide - the market that chose FONT and BLINK
and MARQUEE etc.
Or is it the CSS approach of just wack out a spec and then "fix" it
with a few errata?
> > Right, what rendering language does this XBL have that gives us this
> > complete control over how things look?
> CSS is quite capable of doing most widget looks
I'm not interested in widget looks - I'm interested in a date control
being 3 fields, since that is what users understand - can CSS do this?
> > Why would we use the rather hobbled to be backwards compatible WF2
> > proposals in an XBL environment?
> "XBL environment"? XBL, like CSS, is just part of the presentation layer
> on top of HTML, WF2, etc.
Yep, but it's a presentation layer, and you can gladly present XForms
or rich semantics controls in such an environment, no need to hobble
yourself with the rather limited semantics of HTML and WF2.
> Yeah, that level of detail is the domain of the Web Controls 1.0 spec.
So WF2 is even less likely to be used until this Web Controls 1.0
spec. exists, with these interdependencies, don't you think it might
be a good idea to get a decent draft?
More information about the whatwg