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

Alternatives to 'style' attribute?

From: Micah Dubinko <MDubinko@cardiff.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 13:23:58 -0800
Message-ID: <BD2DBD26EE0BAA48B1A425C7BE7923002D011A@csmail.cardiff.com>
To: "'Boris Zbarsky'" <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, Mikko Rantalainen <mira@cc.jyu.fi>
Cc: Daniel Glazman <glazman@netscape.com>, www-html@w3.org

Hi everybody,

The flawed assumption in this argument is that the only choices are to have
a 'style' attribute or not. There are many other possibilities, for instance
<style> elements allowed outside the head, nesting, etc.

Couldn't we brainstorm on some other alternatives? Binary choices are so
limiting! :-)

.micah

-----Original Message-----
From: Boris Zbarsky [mailto:bzbarsky@MIT.EDU]
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 11:04 AM
To: Mikko Rantalainen
Cc: Daniel Glazman; www-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: XHTML 2.0 considered harmful



> You cannot copy and paste *content with the styling information only* if 
> the target medium is sematic one, like (X)HTML. Period.

While this may be what you would like to be the case, in the real world (of
wysiwyg HTML editors, which you probably think cannot exist either) this
situation is not necessarily acceptable.  You _do_ want to be able to copy a
paragraph out of an HTML e-mail and into a document you're writing and
(optionally) preserve the style.

Boris
-- 
Windows 95:
   (noun): 32 bit extensions and a graphical shell for
a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit operating system originally
coded for a 4 bit microprocessor, written by a 2 bit
company, that can't stand 1 bit of competition.
Received on Wednesday, 15 January 2003 16:25:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:54 GMT