On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 11:03:37 +0700, Matthew Raymond
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
CSS is a good rule-based language, and there is a use case -- why
not reuse the CSS engine (selectors, cascading etc)?
Because XBL2 already exists, it's more flexible, and it's not really
that hard once you know how to use it:
If it's possible to express descriptive information like "enable
autoindent", not just event handlers, in XBL2, then I agree that XBL2 is a
good choice.
There is another issue: most modern browsers have a CSS engine, but not
many have XBL2 support. Requiring XBL2 support to be able to control input
features reduces the chance of implementing these controls, and quite
couples the ability to implement fine-tuned input features (which isn't a
hard task by itself once these features are implemented) with the support
for XBL2 (which is hard).
Besides, people are already complaining about how the fact that CSS
is non-XML. Adding behavioral markup (beyond "binding") will just give
them more of a reason to bitch.
Some people complain, some other people are glad. In fact, it's very easy
to write and read CSS because it's not XML.
--
Alexey Feldgendler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[ICQ: 115226275] http://feldgendler.livejournal.com
