Re: stupid multiple definitions for the TYPE attribute

Jordan Reiter (jreiter@mail.slc.edu)
Sun, 7 Sep 1997 15:34:07 -0500


Message-Id: <l03110700b038bef23b5b@[192.168.1.117]>
In-Reply-To: <3412E847.12C0263@sgi.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 15:34:07 -0500
To: Douglas Rand <drand@sgi.com>
From: Jordan Reiter <jreiter@mail.slc.edu>
Cc: "Joel N. Weber II" <devnull@gnu.ai.mit.edu>, www-style@w3.org,
Subject: Re: stupid multiple definitions for the TYPE attribute

At 12:45 PM -0500 1997-07-09, Douglas Rand wrote:
>Why can't a single declaration at the top of the document declare
>the style language being used?  Have I missed a proposal to allow
>users to specify the style content per element?  That would be a
>very bad thing from a browser maker's point of view.
According to an earlier e-mail [1], there is a way to declare it already.
And you're right, allowing a user to specify different kinds of style
renderings would definitely put a burden on the browser maker.  What I
wonder is this:
  1) are there any other style types in the works (I haven't heard of any)
  2) if there are, shouldn't there be some way to use more than one style
in a
     page?

[1] Mack, E. Stephen (estephen@emf.net) "Re: stupid multiple
definitions..." E-mail. 1997-09-06T22:53:57-0700
(like the cite? :-7 )

--------------------------------------------------------
[                    Jordan Reiter                     ]
[            mailto:jreiter@mail.slc.edu               ]
[ "You can't just say, 'I don't want to get involved.' ]
[  The universe got you involved."  --Hal Lipset, P.I. ]
--------------------------------------------------------