Re: <q>

2008/10/29 Justin James <>

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Daniel Glazman []
> Sorry, I missed the link, and thought it needed to be found since Sam was
> not looking for it there.

I looked for it in the catalogue of the library I was writing the email
from; I'd hoped to be able to grab a copy immediately. Given that it wasn't
listed in that catalogue, would likely have been the next
quickest way for me to get a copy.

> OK, and I think that CSS is where this stuff belongs too. Which is
> *exactly* what I have been saying the entire time, and most others on this
> list seem to agree.
> Overall: why the impulse to push this one particular piece of presentation
> logic directly into the HTML spec?

I, for one, have not been insisting that the presentation logic be expressed
in full in the HTML 5 spec. Although I've considered that to be an option,
I've also supported the alternative of having the HTML 5 spec link to the
document containing the full presentation logic.

The HTML 4.01 spec says[1]:

"The sample default style sheet for HTML 4 that is included in [CSS2]
expresses generally accepted default style information for each element.
Authors and implementors alike might find this a useful resource."

And sure enough, it can be found by following the references, which
ultimately lead you to

For HTML 5, in order to avoid the patchy implementation of default styling
seen with HTML 4.x, I would prefer that *if* the default styling is to
expressed in a CSS spec (e.g. CSS 3), the reference to it be worded along
the lines, "The default style sheet for HTML 5 is included in [CSS3]. User
agents are required to implement this default style sheet where rendering to
media capable of supporting the rendering specified by the rules expressed
in it."




Received on Wednesday, 29 October 2008 22:57:03 UTC