Re: Sentence MarkUp

> 
> At 12:47 PM 7/26/95 -0600, Benjamin C. W. Sittler wrote:
> >I realize that CLASS is not just for stylesheets, but are we going to
> >build a library of CLASS names with suggested meanings (and some suggested
> >renderings)? If so, then I would use CLASS, but this hasn't been done so
> >far as I know...
> 
> I think that it would be premature to standardize CLASSes until we see what
> people want to do with them.
> 
> But Benjamin's concern is valid and common.  Others are expressing it in
> various HTML forums.  They want their CLASSed text to be visually
> differentiated ASAP. New browsers are coming out every month, but they are
> no closer to differentiating between CLASSes of text, because they are
> waiting for style sheets.  Therefore people use HTML as presentation markup
> and say they will change to style sheets "when they come out." Designing and
> implementing a good style sheet language takes time, but people are impatient.
> 
> Proposal
> ========
> I suggest we develop a transitional style sheet format while we work out the
> "real thing."  We can call it  "W3C Style Sheets version 0.5" or perhaps
> "W3C Interm Style Sheet format" to indicate that something better is coming.
> Alternately, we might want to keep style sheet version numbers in line with
> HTML version numbers for simplicity.  Everyone knows that HTML 3.0 is
> coming, so they would assume that HTML 3.0 "style sheets" are coming too.
> 
....................
> 
> There are other benefits.  I believe it would:
> 
>    slow the creation of "tomorrow's legacy documents."
>    dispell the myth that the HTML WG is "against" presentation.
>    encourage the usage of CLASS, which would contribute to its usage in
>          robots and other software.
>    allow us to judge how people use CLASS so that we can think about
>          standardizing some usages.
>    increase the awareness of platform portability issues.
>    put the IETF and W3C back in the driver's seat with respect to the
>          direction of HTML and the Web.
> 
> 
> Comments?  Ideas?  Should I present a more technical specification?  I would
> imagine the language would be a touched-up subset of the current CSS proposal.
> 
>  Paul Prescod

I am not sure that all the 'benefits' would arrive as Paul hopes, but I agree
strongly with the need for a properly specified, expansible, stylesheet
language.   The CSS stuff looks very good to me, since it is both easy 
to understand and use.   Question -- how many browser implementors are/will 
be interested in integrating a basic CSS?

Ian

Received on Thursday, 27 July 1995 10:32:58 UTC