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

Re: possibly frivolous suggestion

From: Sue Sims <sue@css.nu>
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 12:35:39 GMT
To: "w3c style" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <366388f7.2686687@mailhost.worldnet.att.net>
On Mon, 30 Nov 1998 11:33:15 -0000, you wrote:

>... I think it would be
>rather fun to implement a new emphasis tag. I see this often, and I use it
>myself. It is the <rant> tag. I'm sure you must agree, it would have many and
>varied uses, and would spread light and joy throughout the web community.

>Very frivolous, but sometimes these things can prove useful. At the moment I
>just do a p.rant and assign the style as a class. A dedicated tag would be
>rather handy though...

A "dedicated" tag is not required. My .rant class lives in my CSS
file, where it should. I might be interested in some sort of
standardization on commonly used class names (.note, .warning, .rant
et.al.). I think Todd posted some at one time, but I can't locate
them. I looked at the Dublin Core recently, but couldn't find them
there, either. I did locate, from Todd's base.css, the following:

 /* Suggested class names .advert .antithesis .callout .colophon
.conclusion .credit
 .detail .excursus .offsite .hilite .initial .irony .key .legal
.marginalia .nav .note
 .opposition .proposal .rant .remark .subhead .successive .summary
.synthesis .teaser
 .thesis .title .warn */

Is there/should there be any effort to standardize on these?

Sue Sims         mailto:sue@css.nu      
Received on Monday, 30 November 1998 07:36:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:26:48 UTC