- From: Wingnut <wingnut@winternet.com>
- Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 07:15:18 -0600
- To: www-html@w3.org
Jens Meiert wrote: > First of all, why was the 'style' attribute declared deprecated in XHTML 1.1 > [1] and will be introduced again in XHTML 2.0 [2]? Did I miss something, or, > for example, is only the Style Attribute Module deprecated (in XHTML 1.1), > but not its attribute...? > > Nevertheless, I absolutely agree that it shouldn't be used [...] and is > therefore deprecated in the recent XHTML specification, but coming across the > 'new' CSS profiles for the 'style' attribute [3] I think it's a good idea to > keep it (due to e.g. the possibility to import stylesheets via this attribute, > which significantly changes the situation, I guess). > > Consequently and due to the publication date of both CSS 3 profiles (May > 2002) and XHTML 1.1 specification (May 2001), I wouldn't wonder that XHTML 1.1 > declared it deprecated while XHTML 2.0 offers it again (if the non-existence > of these profiles was the reason), which could answer my initial question. > Since I'm just spinning around now, I propose to change at least the following > part of the current XHTML 2.0 draft: > > 'Note: use of the style attribute is strongly discouraged in favor > of the style element and external style sheets.' > > ...since the situation really changes as mentioned before -- above all, > being allowed to use imported stylesheets here (which use the referring element > as the 'document' root) might be a really useful complement to format > documents, and it doesn't represent formatting in the document, either. (This doesn't > imply that this action is recommended.) > > -- Well, I'll keep this short for now, and excuse my horrible language use > once again ;) > > > All the best, > Jens. > Hi gang! Just a general reply... not really "countering" any comments. I just want to remind that I still have a need for the style attribute to remain... in order to carry author-preferred styles WITH a node when that node is transcluded. (node serving) I'm still waiting for getStyleRuleById which, as best I can tell, will return a string of name/value pairs used on a given class of stylerule (Yes, all 132+ name/values that aren't null or 0). The style attribute is how I-will/one-can ship-around that stylestring... if I ever get peekStyle methods like these, in dom. The style attribute's ability to carry a node's stylerule... insures that the correct style rule stays with the correct node during transclusion. Node viewer apps will need that embedded (and retrievable) style... when a node has been gleaned from afar... and when the node viewee wants to honor the node author's original styling preferences. See more at... http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2003Mar/0030.html Too bad this has to keep being brought up... but I'm not going to sit back and allow the subtle trivialization of the style attribute, when I THINK it needs fleshing-out, not deprecation. People seem to forget about transclusion (node gleaning from afar), and thus they forget about considering how to carry the node's (and node-author's) style WITH the node when its "pulled". There must be a "pocket" to carry that stylestring-in, and the style attribute is it, so far. As it currently stands, I would not call a node "transcludable" unless its entire style rule is within its style attribute. Otherwise, author-preferred style on that transcluded node... is being ignored after transport. Right now its a contorted two part operation which requires a "content management system" (cms) behind the web server. First, manager:getNodeById(namespace, id) to get the node... and then manager:getStyleByNode(namespace, nodeId)... and then we can hook the two together at server or requester end. The second step could be skipped if manager:getNodeById(namespace, id) returned a node (in cms-like string form, whatever THAT is) with a style attribute already INSIDE it... containing the proper goods. (Understand that these cms method calls return strings, not references to nodes like dom methods of like-name do. These strings will be made into webpages for delivery, for a webserver is currently not equipped to be asked-for a single node or single style, or deliver such without a document wrapping it... as far as I know.) Unfortunately though, a style sometimes needs to be cascaded into a certain 'inheritence state' when it is referenced by a node. So, a stylerule-extracting content management system (cms) will almost need to sim-grow the document into a dom tree (cascading the style), then manually peek all 132 css properties FOR the outbound node (if its been styled at all). Then, the cms must build a style string of 132 name/values and put it in the node's style attribute, probably overwriting any style attribute already found there. Lastly, the cms wraps the nodestring (with 132-prop style attribute) into a document so the webserver can deliver it to the requester. This all sounds complicated because I'm not overly bright... but in short, we WILL have a need to transclude styles WITH nodes under certain circumstances. Let's stay prepared for that future tech... by adding "also used as a style-carrying suitcase when the node goes traveling" to the "uses for the style attribute". If the style attribute leaves the scene, I gaurantee I will be back to talk about this subject yet again. Potential thread-hijacking averted! Continue-on safely. :) Wingnut
Received on Saturday, 21 February 2004 08:18:42 UTC