W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > May 2007

Re: Proposal: Chained Classnames

From: Philip Taylor (Webmaster) <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 12:02:28 +0100
Message-ID: <464C3644.7050404@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
To: HTML Working Group <public-html@w3.org>



Gervase Markham wrote:

> In summary: some people think that this is a bad idea because this class 
> name (and other undecorated ones) may already be in use on the web with 
> semantics different from those which we propose to apply, and/or the 
> author may have trusted our promise that class names are not supposed to 
> mean anything.

Not "not supposed to mean anything" /per se/, but rather not to
have any /a priori/ meaning.  In other words, a class name,
properly used, /should/ mean something, but what it means
is for the author to decide.

Philip Taylor
Received on Thursday, 17 May 2007 11:02:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:15:58 GMT