Re: style sheets with ancient browsers

Joel N. Weber, II writes:

 > Still, it bothers me that the comments are comments in some places and 
 > have to be ignored in others.  It seems that we're kludging to get 
 > backwords compatibilty, with the net result that 20 years from now, the 
 > rules for comments are going to be ridiculously complex.

Actually, since STYLE is decalred as CDATA a confroming HTML parser
should not look inside it. Supporting <!-- and --> in the CSS grammar
is trivial. Also, we are not changing the rules for comments -- this
is all within the bounds of SGML. (I, like many other people, find
those rules to be less than intuitive, but there we are)

 > > But I would agree with you that LINK is preferable.
 > 
 > Can we find a way to write style information in the tags themselves, so 
 > that <STYLE>H1 {color: blue}</STYLE> could be written as
 > <SOMETHING style="H1 {color: blue}">?  Or is that not worthwhile?
 > (Actually, you can do that in <BODY style="H1 {color: blue}">, but we 
 > want to get away from putting everything on the <BODY> tag)

No, you can't do it like you show. The STYLE attribute, when taking
CSS syntax, only accepts CSS declarations -- not full rules:

  <BODY style="color: blue">

The 'color: blue' declaration would apply to the BODY element and
inherit normally from there.

Instead of introducing new syntax in CSS, I'd recommend using LINK to
avoid the problem you are describing.

Regards,

-h&kon

H   å   k   o   n      W   i   u   m       L   i   e
howcome@w3.org   W o r l d   Wide  W e b  Consortium
inria §°þ#¡ª FRANCE http://www.w3.org/people/howcome

Received on Saturday, 11 January 1997 22:09:44 UTC