W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2008

Re[26]: css with attribues [software]

From: Dmitry Turin <sql4-en@narod.ru>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 16:24:58 +0200
Message-ID: <191548966562.20080122162458@narod.ru>
To: www-style@w3.org

David,

>> But content itself and look itself are category of thinking -
>> items must be bring to content or look depending of mental
>> characteristics (instead of depending of written language).
DD> I have no idea what  you are trying to say here.

I said about abstract axis,
which we use to separate nature into classes.

I argue about axis, which you use to separate browser window
into content and look.

>>>>>>>> DD> CSS expert working on the look
>>>>>>>> DD> while HTML experts work on the content
>>>>>>>> My signature at the end of each letter is content or look ??!!
>>>>>> DD> It is content.
>>>>>> It is look. Even existance of XSL says about my rightness !!
>>>> You can accept convention, that any look is content -
DD> what something is is not determined by where you put it.

Not 'where', but 'how much time'.

>>   If acronym are in several places of document,
>> it's reasonable to put its expansion into css.
>>   If language are the same for several documents,
>> it's reasonable to put it into css.
DD> No, it isn't, because those pieces of data are about meaning not style.

You mess up 'what is style' and 'where are saved'.

---

>> DD> it also does a number of
>> DD> things which makes it incompatible with it.
DD> Media types is the obvious one.

As was said,

@media all {
  tag {attr:val}
}

---

>>>>>>>> Multiple repeated attributes ON CONCRETE SITE are 'look' ONLY,
>>>>>>>> independently of how W3's officials specify them.
>> DD> I rather system the OED would disagree with you.
DD> The Oxford English Dictionary.

I found in Wikipedia, but i'm not finding bond between
quoted question and OED.

>>>>>>>> DD> "I am writing CSS, therefore I am describing how the
>>>>>>>> DD> semantics should be represented to the user".
>>>>>>>> Yes, but with redundant 'style='.
>>>>>> DD> Authors do not have to use style attributes
>>>>>> DD> (and generally should not use them).
>>>>>> I.e. create unique class for unique place of site ?
>>>> What is the third way, about which you are speaking ?
DD> there are other types of selectors in CSS, so a selector can be
DD> written to match an element without creating a class.

I said, that eigther redundant 'style=',
or unique class for unique place.
You are objecting me, but don't explain by what.



Dmitry Turin
SQL5      (5.10.0)  http://sql50.euro.ru
HTML6     (6. 5.2)  http://html60.euro.ru
Unicode7  (7. 2.1)  http://unicode70.euro.ru
Computer2 (2. 0.2)  http://computer20.euro.ru
Received on Tuesday, 22 January 2008 14:48:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:58 GMT