- From: Dan Dorman <dan.dorman@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 15:07:43 -0600
On 5/1/07, Brenton Strine <Brenton.Strine at citrix.com> wrote: > If all HTML tags > imply some meaning, then you are advocating the > elimination of presentation, not it's separation. An HTML document ought to make semantic sense, without regard to presentational information. The very definition of the separation of presentation from content is that the content should be authored without regard to how it will appear. That's not to say presentation is being eliminated, however; presentation simply should not be a consideration in how the content is authored. Ideally, anyway. > If there weren't any CSS hooks, wouldn't people just > (incorrectly) use other tags, like <h1>? I think that CSS > and HTML are unbreakably connected. Indeed, one could say CSS is fundamentally dependent on HTML; the reverse is not true. Imagine a new technology came along to make HTML pretty: wouldn't it be nice if you didn't have to rewrite the HTML to service this new technology? As to folks using incorrect tags, well, what you're proposing isn't going to fix that. I think the supposition that multiple class names are confusing is flawed. What's wrong with saying <div class="redtext indentmore"> (besides the fact that you'd want more useful, informative class names than "redtext" and "indentmore")? By looking at it, someone could readily tell it's got the properties of both "redtext" and "indentmore". In my estimation, being able to combine classes is one of the more powerful aspects of CSS. Dan Dorman
Received on Tuesday, 1 May 2007 14:07:43 UTC