W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > February 2000

RE: "fighting it out between WGs" (was: inline CSS)

From: Jelks Cabaniss <jelks@jelks.nu>
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2000 00:36:36 -0500
To: <www-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <NBBBICMNIPCICMKJECCBGEIGDGAA.jelks@jelks.nu>
Frank Boumphrey wrote:

> I confess that during the development stages of a document i make great use
> of inline styling, but when I have finished, I move it all out to the place
> where IMO it needs to be, namely a style sheet!

IMO, that's an excellent reason for keeping inline CSS.  A number of us do just
that very thing.  Yes, inline CSS can be easily abused, but so can lots of
things.  Do we deprecate everything that *can* be abused?

I suggested in a previous message that it will be a step forward when authoring
tools generate

	1) inline CSS for font/color/size, etc. (first drafts)
	2) a "Move-inline-to-Embedded/LINKed" command (later drafts)

The prompts for *naming* the formats (using CLASS or ID) should come with #2.

Hmmm.  Maybe you could have the tool insert the Legacy module for step 1, then
remove it upon step 2.

On second thought, nah, too much jumping through hoops.

(Note: FrontPage 2K -- yes, 2000 -- need not apply; the buttons generate FONT --
there's no option to set this behavior -- and you have to jump through hoops to
use CSS at all.)


/Jelks
Received on Wednesday, 23 February 2000 00:39:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:42 GMT