- From: Charles Peyton Taylor <ctaylor@wposmtp.nps.navy.mil>
- Date: Tue, 06 Aug 1996 13:14:10 -0800
- To: www-html@w3.org
But I thought the reason for CLASS sets in the first place was to specify *special*, author-defined instances of content that aren't separate elements. If you are going to standardize a class as a specific content type I don't see why you shouldn't just make it an element. It would be easier for the author writing the document; perhaps it would be easier on the parsers as well. I think that maybe <link> relations should be standardized, but not classes. >>> Paul Prescod <papresco@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca> 08/01/96 05:48am >>> >At 12:32 PM 8/1/96 +0200, Arnoud "Galactus" Engelfriet wrote: >>This would be a major pain for search engines and indexing robots, as >>they'd have to parse style sheets to obtain this information. >> >>It's similar to using <SPAN CLASS=phonenumber> and then specifying how >>it should be displayed in the style sheet, rather than having a standard >><PHONE> element, which the browser can display/render/dial/stuff-in-a- >>phone-book any way it likes. > >It doesn't really matter whether you do it in CLASS or with an element. The >important thing is that it be _standardized_. We should standardize CLASS sets >just as we standardize entity and elemenet sets. > > Paul Prescod > > C h a r l e s P e y t o n T a y l o r ctaylor@nps.navy.mil The opinions and views expressed ## even though we're on our own, are my own and do not reflect ## we are never all alone, Those of the Naval PostGraduate School ## when we are singing, singing. http://vislab-www.nps.navy.mil/%7ectaylor/
Received on Tuesday, 6 August 1996 16:17:45 UTC