- From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 13:45:35 +0900
- To: Molly Holzschlag <molly@molly.com>
- Cc: "'public-evangelist@w3.org' w3. org" <public-evangelist@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Hi Molly,
Le 06-02-06 à 13:37, Molly Holzschlag a écrit :
> Note the date on that article - September 1999! I definitely do NOT
> think
> this way anymore and I'm sure many other Web designers don't
> either. With
> descendant selectors now so widely available, classing links is a bad
> practice IMO.
yes agreed with you. But the "legacy" code is online, so the
practices of many web designers will stay for a while. And your
article is cool in this sense, because it shows how someone would
have done in the past. Don't fix your article (at least for
historical purpose).
It's why I was wondering if Ian could do a selection by date (when
possible). It's difficult because often HTTP headers are very badly
used. In fact, people often complain about HTML, but it's often worse
on the front of HTTP in terms of implementations and/or usages.
For your article it popped up with ;)
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=class%3D%22link%22
+css&btnG=Search
--
Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager, QA Activity Lead
QA Weblog - http://www.w3.org/QA/
*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Monday, 6 February 2006 04:45:48 UTC