Re: Tag Soup.

Arnoud (galactus@stack.urc.tue.nl)
Wed, 14 Aug 1996 20:07:47 +0200


From: galactus@stack.urc.tue.nl (Arnoud "Galactus" Engelfriet)
To: www-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: Tag Soup.
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 1996 20:07:47 +0200
Message-ID: <zXhEy4uYOZoG089yn@stack.urc.tue.nl>

In article <321198F1.59E2B600@uk.fnx.com>,
Abigail <abigail@uk.fnx.com> wrote:
> Arnoud Galactus Engelfriet wrote:
> > One reason is that every browser would have to support every tag we
> > can think of. With classes, you can ignore them safely, or only
> > rely on them to look up the rendering information in the style sheet.
> 
> This strikes me as a bit absurd. If we have thingy X, and X is expressed
> in elements, then it will be a problem if some browsers don't handle
> those elements, but if X is expressed using a style sheet, then it
> suddenly can be ignored safely? Like, the <IMG> tag is bad because

Sorry, I was a bit unclear there. If you define tags for everything,
you have to rewrite the standard every time someone comes up with a
new one. With CLASS, you can invent your own stuff without ending up
with an invalid document.

Also, CLASS requires the use of an existing tag. This means that a
browser which does not understand the CLASS in question will just use
the default value of the tag. <EM CLASS=legal.warning> degrades a lot
better than <LEGAL-WARNING>, for example.

Galactus

-- 
To find out more about PGP, send mail with HELP PGP in the SUBJECT line to me.
E-mail: galactus@stack.urc.tue.nl - Please PGP encrypt your mail if you can.
Finger galactus@turtle.stack.urc.tue.nl for public key (key ID 0x416A1A35).
Anonymity and privacy site: <http://www.stack.urc.tue.nl/~galactus/remailers/>