W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > December 1995

RE: draft-ietf-html-style-00.txt & class as a general selector

From: <cwilso@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 08:46:54 -0800
Message-Id: <c=US%a=_%p=msft%l=RED-73-MSG951207084653EB008406@red-01-msg.itg.microsoft.com>
To: <www-style@w3.org>
Paul Prescod wrote:
>At 04:42 PM 12/6/95 -0800, cwilso@microsoft.com wrote:
>>I'm a little unclear on why it is desirable to separate CLASS and a 
>>classification of style - Michael, could you explain this?  In the limited 

>CLASS is a way of semantically subclassing elements.  Applying a style is
>just one reason you would want to subclass an element.  Creating CLASSes
>with types of "big" or "blue" or "five_point" are just as bad as creating
>elements named "<BIG>" or "<FONT>".  If you absolutely must put style
>information directly in your HTML document, and that style information does
>not correspond to a semantic subclass, then you should use some other
>attribute, such as STYLE.

Ah, I see.  I suppose I was thinking in terms of attaching style to 
sections/elements that _could_ be considered as document structure items 
(e.g., a class of <LI> for table of contents entries - bad example, but you 
get the idea).

>I am not entirely in favour of STYLE especially a STYLE that allows direct
>application of arbitrary style sheet directives, but I am certainly against
>using CLASS for that.

I feel there is a distinct need for attaching arbitrary style sheet 
directives.  I understand your concerns about using CLASS now, but I would 
caution against trying to add another global attribute to HTML.  Perhaps a 
subclassing semantic in CLASS?  I don't know...

Received on Thursday, 7 December 1995 13:02:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:26:38 UTC