W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > May 2007

Re: Proposal: Chained Classnames (was: Extension Mechanism for HTML)

From: Charles Ying <charles.ying@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 11:22:54 -0700
Message-ID: <3db207a40705141122r36d2f2b0vc74bce8e2d36613b@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Maurice Carey" <maurice@thymeonline.com>
Cc: "HTML Working Group" <public-html@w3.org>

On 5/11/07, Maurice Carey <maurice@thymeonline.com> wrote:
> What was the argument against using prefixes?
> Why would class="_copyright" be bad?
> Some people (like php programmers) are used to things that start with an
> underscore being reserved by the language.

A: There is no argument against _ as a prefix, if it's deemed a valid
alternative, but I had heard further proposals for h5_ as a prefix or
html5_ as a prefix which motivated me to propose this as a cleaner
alternative if the prefixes had to be that long to begin with.

I'm perfectly fine and happy with _ as a prefix, just not longer
prefixes and in relation to the other arguments (class= vs role=,
cowpath=, etc.)

Updated: http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/ProposalChainedClassnames

Received on Monday, 14 May 2007 18:22:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:20 UTC