W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 2005

Re: New layout language.

From: <Kris@meridian-ds.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 17:59:27 -0500
To: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF8B96329B.84669F8A-ON86257037.007E4AC6-86257037.007E4AE9@meridian-ds.com>

<laughs/>  This made me laugh:

>What I don't understand is the use of classes in the examples you're
>giving. Wouldn't ID's be more appropriate since each div is unique in
>a page? A class should be able to be used many times, should it not?

This is an interesting question.  It made me laugh because in some respects
I'm probably abusing exactly the css aspects you'd like to see eliminated.
In the case of our example here I used classes out of habit.  I use classes
for EVERYTHING unless I'm positive it will only be used once.  The canvas
class I very nearly made an id for example because I was positive I would
only use it once.

Generally I like to format classes of boxes that are styled a certain way
and will always have say... an h1 and p tag inside.  These box classes are
usually used for say... news articles or something like that.  So I intend
for them to be quite numerous on the screen.  Up to 10 of them in some
cases.  An id would stop that from being able to occur.  Further more, I
can completely style the h1 and p tags inside these classed boxes with
selectors and that's handy as well.  If I were to use an id instead this
use would essentially dissappear for me.  So it's that sort of use that has
caused it to become habit to use classes.

Concerning your equation... again, I'm not super good at this sort of
stuff, but wouldn't that equation cause all layouts to be mirrored?

Lemme know.

Received on Thursday, 7 July 2005 22:59:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:19 UTC