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

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

From: Benjamin C. W. Sittler <bsittler@prism.nmt.edu>
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 14:19:46 -0700 (MST)
To: www-style@w3.org
Message-Id: <Pine.SUN.3.91.951208140518.2408B-100000@dunn>
On Fri, 8 Dec 1995, Hakon Lie wrote:

> lilley@afs.mcc.ac.uk writes:
...
> Having a shorthand for ID is not only a syntactical convenience;
> knowing that the attribute is unique will help implementors. We were
> thinking about a different shorthand:
> 
>   "x67y" { .. }
> 
>  > So
>  >  
>  >  bar.foo {something }         all bar elements with class attribute foo
>  >  .foo { something }           all elements with class attribute foo
>  >  #42 { something }            the element with id attribute  42
>  > 
>  > This gives a concise and regular notation, it seems.
> 
...
> A few questions remain:
> 
>  - should one also allow the more verbose versions (CLASS=foo,
>    ID=x67y) in CSS1?
> 
>  - what do people prefer, 
>  -- #x65y or "x56y" ? 
>  -- @CLASS=foo or [CLASS=foo] ?

I prefer the [CLASS=foo] and .foo forms to the @CLASS=foo form. I really 
like both the #foo and [ID=foo] forms, one for ease of use, the other for
completeness.

Benjamin C. W. Sittler
Received on Friday, 8 December 1995 16:21:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:53:43 GMT