[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
Fw: CSS and XSL
Subject: Fw: CSS and XSL From: "Oren Ben-Kiki" <oren@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 14:53:00 +0200 |
Frank Boumphrey <bckman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > CSS is a compact, easy to understand, and easy to program style language. >As written CSS syntax is sparing of resources. Even when one uses a built in >xml parser > >body{ > background-color:red; > color:green; > } > >.emphasis{ > font-weight:bold; > font-style:italic; > } > >Is not only terser, but technically easier to parse than: > >(Horrid XML version omitted) But not that much better then: <css:stylesheet> <css:rule match="body" background-color="red" color="green"/> <css:rule match=".[@class='emphasis']" font-weight="bold" font-style="italic"/> </css:stylesheet> BTW, most of the arguments of "keeping style in a single attributes" are directly convertible to "keeping style attributes in a single tag" - in this case, either <css:rule> in a stylesheet or a <css:style> tag embedded inside any other tag. This keeps DTDs clean and simple, separates references to style attributes in the DOM (element.style.<attribute>) and in general is a Good Thing (tm). The point is, all these advantages can be obtained within the XML framework - there's no real reason for a single textual STYLE attribute. Share & Enjoy, Oren Ben-Kiki XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: CSS and XSL, Jelks Cabaniss | Thread | Re: Fw: CSS and XSL, Simon St.Laurent |
Announcement: DocZilla Preview and , Mirja Hukari | Date | Re: Fw: CSS and XSL, Simon St.Laurent |
Month |
Keywords