Re: <q>

2008/10/29 Justin James <j_james@mindspring.com>

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Daniel Glazman [mailto:daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com]
> 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, Amazon.co.uk 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 http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/sample.html.

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."

Regards,

Sam

[1]http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/present/styles.html#h-14.2