RE: Most compatible, non-stupid ways to style text

No not really. What this is trying to accomplish is to separate
presentation from content. Which means that tags such as the font tag
should NOT be used inside a template. This is where the role of the
style sheet is so powerful, when dealing with hundreds and hundreds of
separate templates that use one style for headings (just as an example).

 
So I certainly agree with the fact that the standards have to evolve,
hence deprecate old and non-standard formatting tags. 
 
-- Niklas 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Monica Moen [mailto:monica@spsp.com] 
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 17:16
To: www-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: Most compatible, non-stupid ways to style text
 
I'm confused.  And I guess maybe there are a couple of issues here.  Why
W3c would strike the FONT attribute/tag in itself is beyond me because
is a commonly used tag and commonly used word for that matter in the
whole sense of formatting text/character...not just in HTML.  Most
publishing applications and word processing apps refer to formatting
text/character as "font" formatting...IT MAKE SENSE.  However, I think
the other issue is that certain elements of that attribute are
depreciated and should be named obsolete for good reasons...browser
compatibility and what not.  But to strike the actual tag all together
is a separate issue.  I use the font tag in conjunction with style
sheets when I want to format a font within the HTML document.   It's all
how you approach it.  With the use of stylesheets, the FONT attribute
(or tag if you will) should be considered as just a container of
text/characters for formatting and elements should be defined in
stylesheets.  The web-editor (if they want to be W3C compliant) would
then make sure the elements are compliant.  This should have nothing to
do with the tag itself.  If a web editor is not using stylesheets to
format, it's their loss.  But don't get rid of the  FONT tag .... p l e
a s e.  
 
Is anyone on the same page as I?