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

Re: the STYLE attribute

From: Walter Ian Kaye <boo@best.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 1995 00:31:10 -0800
Message-Id: <v02120d05accb546bc6c9@[]>
To: html-wg@oclc.org, www-style@w3.org
At 2:52p 11/10/95, Benjamin C. W. Sittler wrote:
>On Fri, 10 Nov 1995, Joe English wrote:
>> A STYLE attribute is not _necessarily_ a horrible idea, but
>> it's vital that a single style notation be standardized before
>> adding it to HTML.
>Not necessarily, so long as we stick to a STYLE element in HEAD with a
>NOTATION attribute, or to external stylesheets and content negotiation.
>On a purely experimental basis, I built Navipress and CSS stylesheets for
>one of my pages and used content negotiation very successfully to get the
>correct stylesheets for three different browsers. (The browsers were
>emacs w3-mode, Arena 0.97 and a Navipress beta.)

How about this:

<TITLE>Walter's Styles Mini-Proposal</TITLE>
   <STYLE NOTATION="x-wik" SRC="internal" PRIORITY=2>
   <!-- style sheet embedded into document (only if src="internal") -->
      (subhead.main: FONT=helvetica; SIZE=18; TYPESTYLE=Bold)
      (small.caps: FONT=helvetica; SMALLCAPS=0.7)
      (body.text: FONT=Times; SIZE=14; TYPESTYLE=Plain)
   <P STYLE="small.caps">This Would Be Small Caps In Helvetica</P>
   <P STYLE="body.text">This would be in Times Roman font</P>

STYLE as an element (in <HEAD> only) would provide the user agent with the
stylesheet itself (whether embedded/internal or external), while STYLE as
an attribute (in <BODY> only) would reference specific stylenames.

This is most natural to anyone coming from, say, Microsoft Word (like myself).


    Walter Ian Kaye <boo@best.com>       | Excel | FoxPro | AppleScript |
          Mountain View, CA              |--------- programmer ---------|
 http://www.natural-innovations.com/     |   Macintosh    |   Windows   |
Received on Sunday, 12 November 1995 03:31:18 UTC

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