On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 14:44:15 -0700, Bert Bos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
My proposal would be to put the 'binding' property in the XBL
specification, rather than in the CSS specifications, thus making it
only a requirement if you implement XBL.
It doesn't matter what spec you put it in, it's still in CSS. (It's also
not very user-friendly to put a part of CSS in a spec that is published
by another WG than the CSS WG, but we can maybe solve that with a good
catalog of properties.)
Sure, there can be profiles of CSS. Printers don't do :hover and they
won't do XBL either. But the general principle is that an
implementation on a platform that could do feature X, *should* do
feature X. Optional features aren't good.
FWIW, you need XBL for the property to be useful. It makes no sense for a
UA to support binding while not supporting XBL so it kind of makes sense
to have it in the XBL specification, imho. Of course, having an overview
of all CSS properties (and other stuff like selectors etc.) including the
necessary pointers would be quite useful.
--
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
