Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
> -----Original Message----- > From: Bjoern Hoehrmann [mailto:derhoermi@g...] > > * Simon St.Laurent wrote: > >IE is a long ways further off, and probably the main blockage for such > >usage today. I really hate the way it handles XML+CSS or even worse, XHTML+XML+CSS. Although IE is a great platform for web developers to build upon, it could have better CSS support. I find it irritating for a browser to support client side transformations and XPath while not recognizing CSS selector syntax e.g.: elem > childElem {/*...*/} (I know we've been through this in www-style but I think it's worth mentioning here). Also, there are some bugs/weird behavior in IE6 when it comes on CSS+namespaces. > I still don't see any good reasons why I should use my own proprietary > document language plus CSS for my homepage instead of XHTML plus CSS. Neither do I. But, it makes sense when you design a *custom* graphical application interface (although I feel forced to use SVG for this) developed around your XML data. Besides, if your markup can be rendered as XML+CSS then I don't think it's "proprietary"! > >XSLT is useful, but I can't see myself telling graphic designers at WEB2001 > >(where I presented yesterday) that they _have_ to learn XSLT to get XML > >information to a browser. I would bring up the same example to prove the opposite; it is easy for graphic designers to make (X)HTML templates for a developer to target with XSLT+XML. Kindest regards, Manos
|
