We're bound to get at least a few differing opinions here, but this is
where I stand. If HTML doesn't allow for any specificity of behavior,
where is this to be specified? It's nice to be able to say, "not my
problem", but we do have to take this into consideration. Whose
problem is it?

Orion Adrian

On 6/13/05, John Foliot - WATS.ca <foliot@wats.ca> wrote:
> 
> Laurens Holst wrote:
> >
> > The alternative is to just script it using Javascript. Not that
> > difficult, and perfect separation of content, behaviour and style.
> 
> Which begs the question: how close to this ideal is XHTML 2 striving for?
> *SHOULD* it be absolute and strict?  Or is there room for 'wiggle'?
> 
> David Whooley suggests (if I read this right) that switch and case elements
> are, "...presentational/behavioural elements and therefore shouldn't be in a
> structural language."  I tend to agree, and pose this general question to
> all - is David right?  Is this the future of XHTML 2?  Is this strict
> separation of content and behaviour what is required, or should these types
> of behavioral (attributes? functions?) remain?
> 
> Just curious...
> 
> JF
> --
> John Foliot  foliot@wats.ca
> Web Accessibility Specialist / Co-founder of WATS.ca
> Web Accessibility Testing and Services
> http://www.wats.ca 
> Phone: 1-613-482-7053
> 
> 
> 
>