W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > January 2003

Re: XHTML 2.0 considered harmful

From: Mikko Rantalainen <mira@cc.jyu.fi>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 20:11:36 +0200
Message-ID: <3E25A458.901@cc.jyu.fi>
To: Tantek «elik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
CC: www-html@w3.org

Tantek «elik wrote:
> On 1/15/03 9:00 AM, "Jonas JÝrgensen" <jonasj@jonasj.dk> wrote:
>>Tantek «elik wrote:
>>>I think this is in general the problem with the discussion of the 'style'
>>>attribute.  On one side there are semantic purists that don't understand
>>>what the problem is and therefore claim there is no problem, and on the
>>>other side there are _experienced_ folks that have seen numerous real world
>>>situations where the style attribute is not only useful, but essential.
>>>These real world situations have been listed in threads in this list, but
>>>always ignored or belittled.
>>Name one. Just one.
> Please research the archives of www-html and www-style.  Many others have
> provided many examples, and some (like Daniel Glazman, and Chris Mannall)
> continue to do so.

Hey, if majority here thinks that style attribute should go away then it 
should be pretty clear that asking us to find reasons to keep it ourself 
isn't going to help. I understand that your time might be taken by more 
important stuff, but if you cannot provide an even one valid example 
(write a description of situation to the list or provide an URL) to 
defend style attribute, then the only reasonable decision is to remove it.

Couldn't it be that you've seen reasons to keep style attribute in 
history and those reasons sounded like valid at that time; you guess 
that those reasons are still valid and just tell us to seek around 
without any specific pointers.

I still repeat that I'm not against keeping the style attribute per se, 
but I'm against keeping it without a good reason. And I haven't seen 
such a reason yet.

The style attribute is guilty and should be removed, unless proven 
innocent. :)

Research report (only a few latest posts)

Glazman said that id + CSS had some issue with namespaces. No further 
explanation provided. Copy and paste was another issue but I already 
addressed that one.

Mannal mentioned the issue between the DOM interaction and style 
attribute. I already replied to that too.

Received on Wednesday, 15 January 2003 13:11:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:06:02 UTC