Re: Why the style attribute shouldn't be abandoned

> Rene Saarsoo wrote:
> > 5. What about JavaScript style property?
> >
> > Even when we remove @style, the JavaScript style property
> > will still have to remain. And it clearly should, because
> > how else could you animate elements and do other dynamic
> > stuff like that?
> There are other methods that can be used to dynamically alter the CSS:
> 1. DOM Core via manipulation of class attributes, style elements, and/or
> link elements
> 2. DOM2 Style
> 3. CSSOM
>
> I suppose that they're not as convenient if you want to target a single
> element and change only a few properties though.
>
>
Only in extreme cases where it's the only appropriate thing to do, as a
JavaScript developer, will I even consider making stylesheet changes via the
DOM.  Getting scripts to work cross browser on that front is incredibly
painful.  PPK took a shot at it a while back, and had to resort to using an
"ugly kludge".

This page is a good highlight of the problems involved, though:
http://www.quirksmode.org/dom/changess.html

It's possible that this is going outside of the scope of this working group,
but for even the simplest DHTML work, the style property is essential.

I agree, though, that the style attribute isn't conforming, and even if it
were, the JavaScript style property would be infinitely more useful simply
returning computed styles, rather than the value of the style attribute.
However, that raises a problem with implementation logistics when setting
style rules (i.e. what are you setting, if not the inline style?) for an
element, which may or may not have an id attribute.

I haven't got a solution to propose here, but making changes to the
stylesheet itself isn't a solution so far as I'm concerned for the problem
of changing styles on specific elements via JavaScript.

 - Dave Choi