- From: Mihai Sucan <mihai.sucan@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 12:47:28 +0300
- To: "David Hyatt" <hyatt@apple.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
Le Mon, 25 Sep 2006 04:45:15 +0300, David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com> a écrit: > > I'd say use a class attribute on your image links and spare yourself the > lousy page performance of a parent selector. :) The class attribute is > so useful at obviating the need for all these fancy selectors and will > perform better in any modern browser than all these more advanced > selector alternatives. Maybe some people view this kind of class > attribute document pollution as a bad thing, but it allows for simpler > rule construction and much better performance. > > I suppose you might counter that this kind of rule would be useful in a > user stylesheet, but user stylesheets are only interesting to the > 0.000001% of the browser user population that understand CSS well enough > to construct and apply them. :) > > dave I agree with Patrick. I see a conflict here between "efficient CSS" (using only classes and IDs, divs and spans where needed) versus clean markup (no classes/IDs, no useless divs/spans). In this "conflict" for me clean markup is the one that rocks my boat. I have switched from tables to CSS for this sole purpose. I was "happy" with the layouts and designs I was able to do with tables, but I didn't like the markup. Now I want CSS to do all that (and some more) with no tag soup. -- http://www.robodesign.ro ROBO Design - We bring you the future
Received on Monday, 25 September 2006 09:47:42 UTC