Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmat89
1. That's how DOM works. 2. Which other styles? There is no difference between styling <p>s and styling <p>s and <poem>s. You want a heading, you use 2 or 3 styles to make it. What do you need 'extra' styles for?
|
My problem is that that is a lot of code which doesn't currently exist, with no justification to why it is needed, and no adequate explanation for what you expect people to do, if they want to do something that doesn't have a semantic element you have defined.
Quote:
|
Personal attacks? How quaint.
|
I apologize for injecting humor into my post, I didn't realize you wouldn't take humor well.
Quote:
|
Assigning styles in a text editor or clicking a toolbar in GUI editor is not radically different.
|
That's how people are currently doing it.
But your suggestion is that people change their whole process to focus on what idealism to call a particular section by, rather than styling it the way it should look.
People who can currently make a book that doesn't conform to your expectations, will have to spend all their time figuring out what to call something, rather than just defining it themselves.
Quote:
|
No. I think CSS should add to logical layout, not define it.
|
OK then. Since you have been very confusing on this point, let me ask you straight out.
When and how do you propose that CSS be used?
Quote:
|
I still don't know where did you get so many misconceptions about XML. In fact it is like XHTML, only better. They can define the same block/run model. They are interpreted by readers in the same way. The only difference is the powerless HTML with few Ebook-specific extensions and the powerful markup tailored for books.
|
Um, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.
You seem to have a love affair with XML, but as everyone else in this thread has repeatedly said, the only difference between XML and XHTML is that XHTML has a schema attached to make it useful.
XML on its own cannot be interpreted
at all.
And you keep saying XML will be better than XHTML, without defining why or what schema will be the answer, which makes me doubt* you have an adequate answer.
* -- OK I lie. I know you don't have an answer. 