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

Re: possibly frivolous suggestion

From: Ian Hickson <py8ieh@bath.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 14:05:47 +0000 (BST)
To: www-style <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.04.9811301350580.10092-100000@amos.bath.ac.uk>
On Mon, 30 Nov 1998, Sue Sims wrote:

> On Mon, 30 Nov 1998 11:33:15 -0000, you wrote:
>> 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.

In that case, would you do away with <ADDRESS> and use <P
class=address> instead? what about OL, UL? Just one list element and
select the type of list by class? They are all dedicated tags.

IMHO, CSS should only be *additional* information. If the CSS is
required to make sense of the document, then it has been abused. If we
follow your argument to it's limit, then why not just use <DIV>, with
suitable classes? All that does is move the structure to a different
level (that of attributes instead of elements).

> 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.

Todd said 'The Core Style project proposed, quietly, the following
"named styles" namespace, with a category devoted to
"functional/presentational"' and then posted the following:

/* Dublin Core Metadata Set */




/* semantic/rhetorical */

.rant                   /* <---- there you go! */

/* functional/presentational */



Ian Hickson
Received on Monday, 30 November 1998 09:05:53 UTC

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