forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Robert Koberg" <>
Subject RE: [RT] Getting rid of the table-based layout
Date Wed, 13 Nov 2002 14:08:51 GMT

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nicola Ken Barozzi []
> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 5:56 AM
> Robert Koberg wrote:
> > The tableless layout is much easier to change into many different views. In
> > fact, I think the whole concept of how you use the word 'skins' leads to
> > confusion. You are saying the XSL is the skin when it is more like
> a skeleton or
> > actually a bag of bones. The CSS is the skin. XSL=structure,
> CSS=style. By going
> > tableless you get closer to the separation of concerns ideal where you can
> > change the entire layout just by dropping in a new CSS - no regeneration and
> > possibly solely in the hands of a designer (though I have yet to
> work with one
> > who can actually use the power of CSS).
> Skin is just more than appearance, it's also about functionality.
> Skins in programs expose buttons that actually do stuff or can hide them
> for simplified stuff.

This is not my experience with skins. A skin only changes how it looks - it does
nothing to the underlying functionality.

> XSL gives you much more flexibility than CSS in this regard, and is the
> only solution for some skinning needs.
> Apart from the fact that server side XSL is still needed for a generic
> cinversion system, I agree that we should in any way incourage and tout
> the use of the forrest skin with custom CSS personalizations.
> Maybe it's a terminology issue, right?
> Now it's
> XSL+CSS=skin
> CSS= personalization
> But you say:
> CSS = skin

XSL = bones (and tendons, ligaments or maybe the tendons and ligaments are
business logic :)

If you drop a new CSS over the same XSL output you change the skin. Where does
the XSL come in?

> Right?

I guess it is a terminology issue, but I do believe skins have nothing to do
with functionality


View raw message