- From: David Seibert <seibert@hep.physics.mcgill.ca>
- Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 16:38:57 -0500 (EST)
- To: "Scott E. Preece" <preece@predator.urbana.mcd.mot.com>
- Cc: papresco@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca, www-style@w3.org, html-wg@oclc.org
On Thu, 7 Dec 1995, Scott E. Preece wrote: > The > places where anonymous styling makes sense are specifically where the > intent of the styling is wholly local; I think the author's mental model > is likely to NOT predict such uses until the text is actually being > written; in fact, that might almost be a defining characteristic of > appropriate uses... I agree with the middle part of your sentence, that's why I suggested putting style declarations in the header *after* organizing the text conceptually (which would include writing the text with a named and hopefully meaningful, at least in a descriptive sense, style attribute). The best authors will tend to do that, and consider the effects of all of their style changes, instead of just writing down style attributes and text simultaneously. Does CSS1 need to support poor practices? Also, how many people *really* use one-time styles very often? I would suspect that a lot of those styles would appear only once per document but would reappear in subsequent documents, especially if the author is reasonably prolific. In this case it would be much easier to reuse the style declarations later if they are collected in the heads rather than scattered randomly throughout documents. Thus, forcing them to the heads might in the end promote more use of styling rather than less, even if some people don't like it in the short term. David Work: seibert@hep.physics.mcgill.ca Home: 6420 36th Ave. Physics Department, McGill University Montreal, PQ, H1T 2Z5 3600 Univ. St., Mtl., PQ, H3A 2T8, Canada Canada (514) 398-6496; FAX: (514) 398-3733 (514) 255-5965
Received on Thursday, 7 December 1995 16:49:45 UTC