- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2007 12:36:35 +0200
- To: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: www-archive@w3.org
On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 12:31:39 +0200, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > Anne van Kesteren wrote: >> On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 11:15:01 +0200, Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com> >> wrote: >>> Also sprach Craig Francis: >>> The style element, when scoped to its parent, will be able to do this >>> -- and more -- but it is more verbose. >> The problem with the style= attribute, as opposed to the <style> >> element. Is that it encourages media specific style sheets. As the >> media for the style= attribute is automatically "all". It also does not >> allow for alternate style sheets. The <style> element in HTML5 handles >> both. Having said that, I don't really care strongly either way. > > These are good things to explain; but IMHO no reasons to deprecate it. > >>> Finally, there's much content out there that uses the 'style' >>> attribute and the cost of keeping it is lower than the cost of >>> removing it. >> User agents will be required to support it. > > In which case it doesn't make any sense to deprecate it when it was > allowed before. FWIW, it's not deprecated. It has been removed from the language. HTML5 does not do deprecation. By your reasoning <plaintext>, <isindex> etc. should also be conforming which doesn't make much sense to me. -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Sunday, 24 June 2007 10:36:30 UTC