- From: David Perrell <davidp@earthlink.net>
- Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 15:36:13 -0700
- To: <www-style@w3.org>, "Liam Quinn" <liam@htmlhelp.com>
Liam Quinn wrote: > Shouldn't FONT be converted into its CSS equivalent, <SPAN STYLE="font- > size: /* some UA-dependent mapping */"> (with a specificity of 1)? In > that case, the FONT element would never be overridden by inherited values; What do you mean by "overridden"? If you put <SPAN>this</SPAN> in your markup, what is the effect on the word "this" if no properties have been declared for SPAN? The answer is none. There are no default values for SPAN except display-type, and all applicable values are inherited. The same is true of FONT. Putting <FONT>this</FONT> in your markup is perfectly legal, and -- without a CSS1 FONT declaration -- perfectly useless. Without an explicit property declaration somewhere, there is no effect. SPAN is not the "CSS equivalent" of FONT. They are separate HTML elements, both with only one declared property, display-type: inline. > Of course, the CSS1 Recommendation only mentions HTML attributes, not HTML > elements. Was this by accident, or was dealing with FONT purposefully > avoided? It isn't necessary. The element is FONT, the HTML attributes are SIZE, COLOR, and FACE. The CSS1 equivalents for these attributes are font-size, color, and font-family. FONT is nothing but a delimiter within which these attributes apply. David Perrell
Received on Monday, 4 August 1997 18:42:50 UTC