- From: Dmitry Turin <html60@narod.ru>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 13:57:32 +0300
- To: public-html@w3.org
Good day, Martin. >> MA> all presentational attributes in HTML should have equivilant properties in CSS ... >> +1 >> >> MA> ... exact name, content model and usage may differ. >> -1 >> I thought exactly about this, when i created topic. MA> So as far as I can tell, you are proposing that: MA> * All CSS properties be allowed as HTML attributes, and MA> * All HTML attributes be allowed as CSS properties Yes. Let Ai is set of attributes of i-th html-element, and let Pi is set of properties of i-th html-element. I offer to append A-A*P into P, and to append P-A*P into A. We can allow this now. MA> I think really your main qualm is that the style="" attribute syntax is MA> quite verbose There are two ones; second is: not presentational attributes should not be specified in CSS as far as binding, aural style, behaviour. ---does not concern our topic: old mistakes MA> For example, <TABLE MA> BACKGROUND="#ffffff"> is not correct: the BACKGROUND attribute expects a MA> URI, not a colour. CSS, on the other hand, considers "background" to be MA> a shorthand for a number of other properties, including background-image. Cross of attribute name and shorthand _does not concern our topic_: this was mistake of planning (project design), because they crosses in mental! So it was _necessary even earlier_ to change name of attribute itself to full-meaning - to <table background-image= >. MA> * there is a massive overlap between CSS properties and HTML attributes. As to A*P, if they have different names, then this is clear mistake of planning ! MA> <table bgcolor="red" background-color="blue">, or you'd have to throw MA> away either most of HTML or most of CSS. Cross of attribute name and property name _does not concern our topic_ too: as i said right before, this is mistake, and we _were duty_ to unify this earlier, i.e. to recommend one name and to deprecate another. And for compatibility, we should accept procedure of solving conflict. I offer: 1) first name in attribute has priority (i.e. @bgcolor over @background-color) 2) name in attribute has priority over name in CSS (as it is now) MA> For example: a#home { href: "/index.html"; } MA> HTML HREF attribute expects a string MA> containing a URI while CSS would normally use url("/index.html"). This was mistake (recall razor of Occam), but thire is no problem: <a id="home" href="/index.html"> but <a id="home"> a#home { href: url("/index.html"); } P.S. As to unification: a#home { href: "/index.html"; } ---in general MA> * there are plenty of HTML MA> attributes that really have no place in CSS. Orthodoxness, no more. MA> for the reasons [...] popular recommendation Next recommendation will be also popular. MA> style information be MA> ommitted from the HTML document completely After unification, nothing disturb you to omit names, corresponding to mentioned information. But besides that, we can assign values to stay-ed names both in tags and CSS. Dmitry Turin HTML6 (6.1.2) http://html60.chat.ru SQL4 (4.1.2) http://sql40.chat.ru Unicode2 (2.0.0) http://unicode2.chat.ru Computer2 (2.0.3) http://computer20.chat.ru
Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2007 12:46:23 UTC