[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Monday 21 October 2002 00:11, J.Pietschmann wrote:
> Do you notice we are about to fight just another religious war about
> "the best syntax"?
Heh, I guess you are right; it's as simple as that. So a formal mapping
between CSS and FO properties is the way to go by
> IMHO the correct approach would have been:
> 1. Decouple syntax from semantics.
Absolutelly; I have found this to be the only solution to a syntax war as you
pointed this issue out.
You then want a well documented and complete map between the two
representations to allow development of tools giving you flexibility between
them. However, 2 - 5 below seems overcomplicated and generic approach where
requierments are formed out of a complete OO model and not just properties;
more specifically, I fail to understand where your focus on inheritance is
applied and what comes in return.
In my naive simplistic view, we only have to deal with two property sets where
one is influenced by the other. This should be enough to allow a direct
mapping between them, although carefull on different property groupings on
the syntax level. The abstract level should't present similar problems, as I
am not aware of incompatibilities between the two sets in property grouping;
just missing parts in either side that have to be imported as extentions from
the other.
To return back to my question on inheritance, perhaps you are talking about
what I think of as groupings, for example the subset of background
properties. Again, OO is a heavy weight for this as a set of simple rules per
attribute group is more than enough to shape the final model of attribute
value pairs out of groups, including values that get overidden between
definitions etc. This will involve ordering per CSS rules (last definition
counts).
I found this to be a post up to the point, I hope CCing this reply to
www-style will not upset it's calm waters ;-)
I'm also sure someone there can provide more details to the right way of doing
this than I am able to.
Regards,
Manos
> 2. Describe the semantics of the relevant presentational properties in
> abstract terms, including the "inheritance" concept and whatever
> seems to be necessary.
> 3. Define a CSS grammar. Define how the abstract presentational property
> definitions are mapped into CSS syntax.
> 4. Describe a mapping of the abstract presentational property definitions
> into an XML attribute syntax (and something about inheritance), and
> perhaps a generic way to use it with any other vocabulary which needs
> to express presentational properties.
> 5. (optional) Describe an XML vocabulary which can express presentational
> property definitions, and a generic way to use it with any other
> vocabulary which needs to express presentational properties.
>
> J.Pietschmann
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
|
