forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicola Ken Barozzi <nicola...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Documentv20 --> DocBook
Date Tue, 30 Dec 2003 09:53:35 GMT
Robert Koberg wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Ross Gardler wrote:
> 
>> As a result it can all be captured in the class attribute. How it is 
>> presented is then up to the rendering engine, which is exactly what 
>> should happen. I have to admit, I was suprised to find that I ended up 
>> agreeing with this view, but agree I did once I tried to justify my 
>> case with what I thought were rock solid use cases!
> 
> I see a few problems if using an (unconstrained) class attribute. First, 
> how is the ~schema~ communicated the users? 

Implicitly.

>Are they a preset list or can they be anything? 

Anything.

> How do you ensure validity?

This is the point, they are *all* valid. It's unconstrained metadata.

The important thing is that class attributes are *extra* metadata, that 
can be ignored.

For example, Forrest will use:

   <p class="note">A note.</p>

and will render it as a note.

But another renderer can easily show it as a paragraph, and it's a 
good-enough aproximation. It's still valid, and the emantical loss is 
not much.

Or it can render it as

note:
  A note.

Bt using the class attribute as a moniker.

The base semantics are in the normal tags, and class tags are *extra* 
semantics. XHTML is made so that they are not necessary to convey the 
information, but enhance it.

-- 
Nicola Ken Barozzi                   nicolaken@apache.org
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------


Mime
View raw message