Re: the STYLE attribute
[ Sorry for the continued cross-posting, but this seems relevant
to both mailing lists... ]
Hakon Lie <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Glenn Adams writes:
> > (2) it should be possible to include multiple STYLE elements, each using
> > different notations (in order to support the specification of appearance
> > not only with different style languages but also with different versions
> > of a style language).
> > (3) it would therefore be impossible to determine what notation a STYLE
> > attribute is using without introducing either (a) a convention which used
> > a prior STYLE element in HEAD to specify a notation which not only applied
> > to that element but which persists to subsequent elements which employed
> > a STYLE attribute (clearly this is a hack); or (b) an application
> > convention that a STYLE attribute always followed a particular notation;
> > (c) an additional attribute STYLE-NOTATION that would be concurrently
> > required with a STYLE attribute (a constraint that an SGML parser could
> > not validate).
> (a) could work just fine, but there is a fourth alternative: an
> attribute to the BODY tag. I believe someone suggested (Bill Perry?)
> this during the workshop.
None of these solutions allow multiple notations to be used
with a single document, though. (``Click _here_ for HTML
with Netscape-format style attributes, click _here_ for
HTML with Arena-format style attributes, click _here_ for PDF.'')
A STYLE attribute is not _necessarily_ a horrible idea, but
it's vital that a single style notation be standardized before
adding it to HTML.