- From: <cwilso@microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 08:46:54 -0800
- To: <www-style@w3.org>
Paul Prescod wrote: >At 04:42 PM 12/6/95 -0800, cwilso@microsoft.com wrote: >>I'm a little unclear on why it is desirable to separate CLASS and a >>classification of style - Michael, could you explain this? In the limited > >CLASS is a way of semantically subclassing elements. Applying a style is >just one reason you would want to subclass an element. Creating CLASSes >with types of "big" or "blue" or "five_point" are just as bad as creating >elements named "<BIG>" or "<FONT>". If you absolutely must put style >information directly in your HTML document, and that style information does >not correspond to a semantic subclass, then you should use some other >attribute, such as STYLE. Ah, I see. I suppose I was thinking in terms of attaching style to sections/elements that _could_ be considered as document structure items (e.g., a class of <LI> for table of contents entries - bad example, but you get the idea). >I am not entirely in favour of STYLE especially a STYLE that allows direct >application of arbitrary style sheet directives, but I am certainly against >using CLASS for that. I feel there is a distinct need for attaching arbitrary style sheet directives. I understand your concerns about using CLASS now, but I would caution against trying to add another global attribute to HTML. Perhaps a subclassing semantic in CLASS? I don't know... -Chris
Received on Thursday, 7 December 1995 13:02:46 UTC