![]() |
|
![]() |
||
![]() |
![]() |
|
[WWW-HTML Mailing List Archive Home] [Messages By Thread] [Messages By Date] Re: why, e.g., input/@checked="checked" ?
From: Andrew Clover <and-w3@doxdesk.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 03:23:17 +0000 Message-ID: <42462743.5090809@doxdesk.com> To: www-html@w3.org Robert Koberg <rob@koberg.com> wrote: > I understand that. I was asking why. HTML (as standardised) adopted an existing idiom for flags. Attribute minimisation is gone in XML, but the legacy remains (and must do for UA compatibility). > What I am trying to say is that it makes generating XHTML output > clumsy/redundant because a source XML used in an XSL transformation to a > templating language for runtime cannot look like Well that's a failing of the templating language rather than XHTML as such. A templating language that aims at being helpful for XML should provide a mechanism for inclusion/exclusion of an attribute. For example in PXTL: <input type="radio" checked="checked{?px_if isChecked?}"/> There are after all many other constructs in non-XML-native templating languages like JSP that can result in source templates that are not well-formed. -- Andrew Clover mailto:and@doxdesk.com http://www.doxdesk.com/Received on Tuesday, 29 March 2005 00:38:23 GMT |
|
||||||||||||||||