In a message dated 95-08-08 19:25:06 EDT, [log in to unmask] (Dave Raggett) writes:
>So what should we do about HSPEC and VSPEC? Keep 'em separate or
>slam 'em together?
Slamming them together makes it easier to add attributes that need to be
applied to a range of cells. An example of this is the control.def attribute
mentioned in my other mail. Under the HSPEC/VSPEC model I would need to
create a new CSPEC tag to define the control defaults. With RANGESPEC it
would just be another attribute.
Nested RANGESPECs also have the advantage of allowing a single class name to
be defined for disjoint/non-rectangular ranges in the table. The nesting will
leave a nice parse tree defining where all of the cells are located.
I think RANGESPEC is more general purpose in nature.
Jon Smirl, [log in to unmask]