- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 14:09:40 -0700
- To: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
- Cc: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 12:43 PM, Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote: >> Banning <font> in general, rather than, say, only when used in a way that >> actually harms accessibility, is analogous to this reasoning. By having the >> blanket ban, we avoid the presumed negative externality, without having to >> closely inquire about the particular circumstances of each use. The latter >> requires too much judgment for a conformance checker. > > Why does this not imply that style="" should be an error as well? The > spec gives reasons for why not all inline presentational markup is > banned, but I see no reason given for why only style="" was kept, and > not other presentational markup as well. (Clipped the rest, but I think this sums up the email.) The answer is, basically, we need @style. Even if every presentational element and attribute that has ever existed was allowed, we'd still need @style. Simplifying and just sucking all the use-cases into @style simplifies things a bit. It also has some side benefits, such as making authors aware that they are using CSS to do this styling, leading them to use CSS elsewhere. ~TJ
Received on Monday, 29 March 2010 21:10:26 UTC