W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > July to September 2002

Re: Migration to CSS (Re: including ruby in an xhtml 1 transitional doc)

From: <bruce.wallman@us.pwcglobal.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 11:56:08 -0400
To: mark@macchiato.com
Cc: "Chris Lilley" <chris@w3.org>, "w3c-i18n-ig" <w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org>, www-international@w3.org, www-international-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF7A391575.92049948-ON85256BEB.00572623@nam.pwcinternal.com>

If anyone can point out a good reference and sample web site, paper, or
book for style sheets, please let me know.

This area seems to have been invented by the browser manufacturers as they
made different aspects work/not work.

Yes, it would be great if anyone documents CSS well. However, I suspect
that this detail is below the level that the W3C wants to handle and

Anyone have any good current references?


                      "Mark Davis"                                                                                                        
                      <mark@macchiato.com>        To: "Chris Lilley" <chris@w3.org>                                                       
                      Sent by:                    cc: <www-international@w3.org>, "w3c-i18n-ig" <w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org>                      
                      www-international-req       Subject:  Migration to CSS (Re: including ruby in an xhtml 1 transitional doc)          
                      07/03/02 11:05 AM                                                                                                   


What I think many people would appreciate is a table that of
correspondences between every single HTML attribute (in context) and
CSS syntax that would replace it. This may exist somewhere, but I
can't find it. It would seem to be a fairly important piece of getting
people to migrate to CSS.

Some of the correspondences are fairly trivial:

<p>The <font face="Whimsy ICG">quick</font> brown fox.</p>
<p>The <span style="font-family:Whimsy ICG">quick</span> brown

Others are a bit of a mystery. Take table borders for example. Someone
starts with example #1 below, and wants to replace the attribute
"border='1'" with CSS.

<table border="1">

He first thinks that #2 would give the same result (in IE, for

<table style="border-style: solid; border-width: 1">

Nope, because #1 has lines around the cells, and #2 doesn't. So he

<table style="border-style: solid; border-width: 1">
    <td style="border-style: solid; border-width: 1">The</td>
    <td style="border-style: solid; border-width: 1">quick</td>

Not quite the same either, since #1 has a 'ridge' effect, which is
missing in the new one. Trying different combinations, he might be
lead to:

<table style="border-style: ridge; border-width: 4" ;>
    <td style="border-style: ridge; padding: 0">The</td>
    <td style="border-style: ridge; padding: 0">quick</td>

But that looks very bizarre; both the table and each cell are
outlined. He can't get them to collapse together. He is about to give
up and keep the original attributes; trying to figure out what works
in CSS is too painful. But at last, he stumbles upon:

<table style="border: outset 1px;">
    <td style="border: inset 1px">The</td>
    <td style="border: inset 1px">quick</td>

It would make migration to CSS a whole lot easier if there were a
table somewhere on the W3C site that showed people the exact
correspondences without everyone having to stumble along and guess!

◄  “Eppur si muove” ►

----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Lilley" <chris@w3.org>
To: <www-international@w3.org>; "Tex Texin" <tex@i18nguy.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2002 03:59
Subject: Re: including ruby in an xhtml 1 transitional doc

> On Wednesday, July 3, 2002, 9:24:37 AM, Tex wrote:
> TT> I have an xhtml transitional page which is using Ruby.
> TT> I would like it to validate. If I change to XML 1.1 which
includes Ruby
> TT> it seems I have to make it a more strictly XML conforming doc.
> Both XHTML 1.0 and 1.1 use XML. There is no notion of 'more strictly
> conforming' to XML.
> TT> What is the proper way to add ruby to a 1.0 transitional doc,
> aha, you refer to 'transitional' vs 'strict'. Yes, transitional is
> being phased out. There is little presentational gloss remaining in
> transitional that you can't do (better) with CSS.
> TT>  or
> TT> alternatively to
> TT> have a 1.1. doc that accepts the older html markup?
> TT> The page in question is:
> TT> http://www.i18nguy.com/unicode/unicode-example-ruby.html
> That file is not even well formed. So since its not XML, its not
> 1.0.
> Six edits (missing spaces between attributes, missing quotes around
> attribute values) made it well formed.
> It was then invalid, because of the ruby, as you note.
> Altering the doctype to XHTML 1.1 strict showed a couple of errors -
> use of the lang attribute (easily fixed by deletion, xml:lang was
> already there, or by search and replace to xml:lang if not).
> Then there was the ultra-simple presentational stuff
> <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFED" link="#0000EE"
> vlink="#551A8B" alink="#FF0000">
> totally simple to replace in less than a minute. You already had a
> link to a stylesheet anyway. And some gratuitous use of center tags,
> again not needed because class="ctr" looks like there is styling
> applied ... and some bare text not inside paragraphs a couple of
> places ... and use of the name attribute instead of the id attribute
> for link destinations.
> Thats it. 7 minutes elapsed time (including blow by blow commentary
> email), valid XHTML 1.1 strict document. XML Spy is wonderful ;-)
> Should I mail it to you?
> --
>  Chris                            mailto:chris@w3.org

         The information transmitted is intended only for the person or
         entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential
         and/or privileged material.  Any review, retransmission,
         dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance
         upon, this information by persons or entities other than the
         intended recipient is prohibited.   If you received this in error,
         please contact the sender and delete the material from any
Received on Wednesday, 3 July 2002 11:56:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 21 September 2016 22:37:22 UTC