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

Re: Proposal: Chained Classnames

From: Dão Gottwald <dao@design-noir.de>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 14:28:58 +0200
Message-ID: <464D9C0A.1070000@design-noir.de>
To: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>
CC: HTML Working Group <public-html@w3.org>

Murray Maloney schrieb:
> At 11:18 PM 5/17/2007 +0200, Dão Gottwald wrote:
>> Sure, just like style rules for [role~="foo"] are connected to the 
>> semantics of an element with the "foo" role. The crux is /default/ 
>> style sheet.
> I'm confused. Or maybe I just don't understand what point you are making.

Chris Adams wrote: "So if the CSS engine defines defaults for class 
names that is wonderful but not really a task left up for the HTML folks."
I'm saying that default styles won't be defined for classes, as that 
would cause mass confusion and break existing page layouts. So the 
question whether this should be done here or in the CSS WG doesn't even 

> However, <i class="shipname">Titanic</i> could get you both a default style
> and an understandable semantic.

But that default style wouldn't be applied due to the class name.

Received on Friday, 18 May 2007 12:29:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:21 UTC