W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 2007

Re: About dropping the style attribute

From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 14:53:26 +0300
Message-Id: <07489C6A-11DC-41D2-8625-362E964E6B9C@iki.fi>
Cc: public-html@w3.org, www-style@w3.org
To: Jens Meiert <jens.meiert@erde3.com>

On Jun 26, 2007, at 13:04, Jens Meiert wrote:

>> I've realized now that the current spec drops the style attribute for
>> all elements except for the <font>, but I can't understand the
>> reasoning behind those decisions.
>
> And neither do I,

As can be discovered by following the URLs in my previous message to  
this thread, it was a failed attempt to attach the stigma of the  
<font> element to the style='' attribute.
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20070503#l-494

> The usual way to address that is by setting "width" and "height"  
> attributes which should be replaced by the "style" attribute (that  
> is presentational by design).

In my opinion, it is extremely silly to think that height='' and  
width='' are bad but style='width: ...; height: ...;' is good. I'd  
rather have height='' and width='' on all elements that are replaced  
elements in the normal case.

>   2. Delivering the ad with 'border="0"' (or worse). (Presentational.)
>   3. Delivering the ad with 'style="border: 0;"'. (More kids in town.)

Those are both presentational. (I'm not implying that presentational  
was bad.)

> Consequently, I consider it not necessarily wise to drop the  
> "style" attribute.

I agree, FWIW. (Perhaps for different reasons, though.)

-- 
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen@iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Tuesday, 26 June 2007 11:53:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:51 GMT