- From: Philip & Le Khanh <Philip-and-LeKhanh@Royal-Tunbridge-Wells.Org>
- Date: Mon, 07 May 2007 14:21:19 +0100
- To: public-html@w3.org, W3C HTML Mailing List <www-html@w3.org>
Lachlan Hunt wrote: > [...] > The disadvantage is that it doesn't directly pave the cowpath made by > existing content, such as the wide use of class=copyright. This last part I do not understand (all that precedes seems fine to me), perhaps because "paving a cowpath" is not an idiom with which I am familiar. But if (as I suspect) it means "reinforcing existing behaviour", then I do not understand the logic. At the moment people use class="copyright" for (I believe) at most two reasons : (1) to provide a hook onto which to hang a CSS rule, and possibly (2) to provide a hook through which to allow access to "copyright" elements via the DOM. If you (we?) are now proposing to add a number of pre-defined classes, all commencing with an underscore, of which one is "_copyright", how does this conflict with existing usage. All extant documents will continue to behave as their authors intended, and new documents can use 'class="copyright"' or 'class="_copyright"' depending as their authors want their own semantics or those prescribed by the specification. If, on the other hand, you want to "reward" those who have already used 'class="copyright"' with the exact semantics intended by the WHATWG, whilst penalising those who have used it with any other semantics, then this seems to me a highly dubious aim, and not one with which I have any sympathy. Philip Taylor
Received on Monday, 7 May 2007 13:21:18 UTC