- From: Philip Taylor (Webmaster) <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
- Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 12:02:28 +0100
- To: HTML Working Group <public-html@w3.org>
Gervase Markham wrote: > In summary: some people think that this is a bad idea because this class > name (and other undecorated ones) may already be in use on the web with > semantics different from those which we propose to apply, and/or the > author may have trusted our promise that class names are not supposed to > mean anything. Not "not supposed to mean anything" /per se/, but rather not to have any /a priori/ meaning. In other words, a class name, properly used, /should/ mean something, but what it means is for the author to decide. Philip Taylor
Received on Thursday, 17 May 2007 11:02:23 UTC