- From: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 23:20:48 +0100
- To: www-html@w3.org
Luca Passani wrote: > > So, you are requested to inject a red sentence into a page you know > nothing about in advance. Injection may happen through innerHTML(), > server-side include or similar. How do you do it without style@ ? > You ask the specifier why it supposed to be red. Hopefully they will tell you what red signifies, and, hopefully the house style will have been properly encapsulated in the style sheet, so you will simply select the class that represents that meaning. If that meaning actually has a different style, you respectively point out that they are violating the house style and ask them how their usage differs from the usage in the house style, and get them to have the house style modified to account for the new variation in usage. If the meaning really is new, you will need to get the house style rules enhanced to cover it. Of course the use of red may be totally gratuitous. That's a rather bad thing if you are producing a user interface, as users will try to make a mental model which reverse engineers the style sheet that should have existed, and fail, because there isn't a consistent one; but another possibility arises: As you said, in real development projects there are all sorts of non-ideal constraint and one of the most common of those constraints is management who specify a particular technology because it is fashionable and gets them marketing buzzword points. If you are getting gratuitous requests to use particular style properties, it is possible that what you are producing is a piece of visual art, for which the words are not really important - often true of advertising copy. W3C have two technologies for mobile devices. The other one is SVG. Leaving aside the accessibility issues (which are often incompatible with the visual concept of a design, anyway), SVG is the more appropriate technology where form is more important than content. Although, particularly on the style lists, there is continuous pressure to blur the distinction between CSS/HTML and SVG, trying to make one technology support all uses typically results in standards bloat and the eventual death of the standard, in favour of a newer, tightly focussed standard. It's certainly not the job of W3C to make standards cope with inappropriate uses. -- David Woolley Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want. RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam, that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.
Received on Thursday, 26 June 2008 22:19:20 UTC