W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 1998

Re: Conversion of HTML attributes to CSS2 properties

From: Frank Boumphrey <bckman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 1998 11:09:25 -0400
Message-ID: <00a301bdc215$7aa6dea0$11addccf@ix.netcom.com>
To: "David Perrell" <davidp@earthlink.net>, "Style" <www-style@w3.org>
Much better put David!

How about a lawyer_speak instead of gobblydygook, or even a special tag
<gobbyldygook></gobbyldygook>

Frank

Frank Boumphrey

XML and style sheet info at Http://www.hypermedic.com/style/index.htm
Author: - Professional Style Sheets for HTML and XML http://www.wrox.com
-----Original Message-----
From: David Perrell <davidp@earthlink.net>
To: Frank Boumphrey <bckman@ix.netcom.com>; Style <www-style@w3.org>
Date: Friday, August 07, 1998 1:24 AM
Subject: Re: Conversion of HTML attributes to CSS2 properties


>Frank Boumphrey vehemently wrote:
>
>
>>>"The UA may choose to honor presentational hints from other sources than
>>>style sheets, for example the FONT element or the "align" attribute in
>>HTML.
>>>If so, the non-CSS presentational hints must be translated to the
>>>corresponding CSS rules with specificity equal to zero. The rules are
>>>assumed to be at the start of the author style sheet and may be
overridden
>>>by subsequent style sheet rules."
>>
>>What this gibberish basically means is that a user agent can choose to
>>display styling type tags provided there is no conflicting CSS rule!!
>
>Close. How about: "A user agent may display HTML element styling
attributes,
>such as 'align', 'color', and 'face', provided there are no conflicting CSS
>rules in the author stylesheet." ?
>
>>The rest is semantics!!
>
>I believe that's semantically incorrect. The rest is *gobbledygook*.
>Semantics is what remains when the gibberish and gobbledygook are
>exclusively-ORed.
>
>David Perrell
>
>
>
Received on Friday, 7 August 1998 11:04:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:53:55 GMT