W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > December 2002

Re: comments on 2002-12-12 XHTML 2.0 WD

From: (wrong string) äper <christoph.paeper@tu-clausthal.de>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:57:19 +0100
Message-ID: <058601c2a745$04d7f8c0$3ef4ae8b@heim4.tuclausthal.de>
To: <www-html@w3.org>

Daniel Glazman:
> Richard Norman wrote:
>> After thinking about this, I believe the the style attribute is good for
>> single instance items like mentioned below.
> Playing devil's advocate, some could answer that you need to use an ID
> selector. But I disagree with that.  Setting an explicit ID on an
> element makes it special, and adds semantics.

The only use-case for the style attribute I can think of (and am using today
sometimes) is in CSS test suites. But it's perfectly legal and logical to
use ids or classes, because the styled part gains special semantics: it's a
test-case or example. It's mostly even more readable with separated CSS.

> And once again, it's not possibvle to copy/paste the element
> (and the element itself) preserving its intrinsic style.

That would be an argument to disallow the style *element* and linked
external stylesheets.

Christoph Päper
Received on Thursday, 19 December 2002 04:57:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:06:01 UTC