Subject: Re: HTML is a formatting/UI language was: RE: Formatting Objects considered harmful From: Chris Maden <crism@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 10:04:04 -0400 (EDT) |
[Håkon Wium Lie] > Paul Prescod wrote: > > Transmitting XHTML probably does not make sense when we could > > instead get the client to do the transformation. I think we can > > all agree on that. > > Yes. But how will you make existing browsers perform > transformations? The same way that existing (pre-v5) browsers will read the dangerous FOs: not at all. For browsers supporting XML/XSL, deliver semantic XML and a presentational stylesheet. For older browsers, deliver semantic HTML. It is possible to deliver presentational-only XML (i.e., FOs) to a new client, but since it can handle client-side transformation, why bother? I feel that you're raising valid concerns about a case that will not occur very frequently at all, since in any browser susceptible to such abuse, there are much better ways of delivering information to it. -Chris -- <!NOTATION SGML.Geek PUBLIC "-//Anonymous//NOTATION SGML Geek//EN"> <!ENTITY crism PUBLIC "-//O'Reilly//NONSGML Christopher R. Maden//EN" "<URL>http://www.oreilly.com/people/staff/crism/ <TEL>+1.617.499.7487 <USMAIL>90 Sherman Street, Cambridge, MA 02140 USA" NDATA SGML.Geek> XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: HTML is a formatting/UI languag, Didier PH Martin | Thread | Re: HTML is a formatting/UI languag, Håkon Wium Lie |
RE: Newbie question, Kay Michael | Date | Re: Formatting Objects considered h, Håkon Wium Lie |
Month |