3 ms·

http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-html5-diff-20080122/#absent-attributes http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-html5-diff-20080122/#absent-att... Look at the things that are

by mojuba 19y ago

http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-html5-diff-20080122/#absent-attributes http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-html5-diff-20080122/#absent-att... Look at the things that are depreceted in HTML5: noshade attribute on hr, nowrap attribute on td and th, width attribute on hr, table, td, th, col, colgroup, iframe and pre, etc etc etc because "they are better handled by CSS". What do they mean by "better"? In other words, things that are used most are deprecated and must be replaced with much more verbose syntax, just because it's right. This is so committee-ish. Do they seriously think they can change the way Internet works?

Xichekolas 19y ago
You're right! The W3C has never had an effect on the way the Internet works... (Sorry couldn't resist.) I generally like the idea of moving stuff into CSS, but I think it goes overboard when you have to define stuff in CSS for a unique occurrence... like defining rules for the one div that wraps my whole page. Why can't that just be defined as attributes to that div? Why do I have to put it in a separate place in CSS-land when it's only used for that specific div element? I'm still hoping for someone to come along and make the whole html/css thing sane. It seems awfully hacky now. Cue flame war
- bct 19y ago
  So put the rules in a style attribute on that one div. That's hardly a reason to clutter HTML up with presentational things.
  - mojuba 19y ago
    HTML is presentational in nature, so what's the point of separating presentational attributes from presentational tags? With the current spontaneously emerged HTML standard we have a choice of using or not using separate style declarations, like in imperative programming we may decide to declare and give a name to frequently used constants, macros and functions separately. A library, in other words. Is library obligatory in programming? No. That would be just ridiculous.
  - cstejerean 19y ago
    style attributes are no longer allowed in HTML5 except on font. Font is also no longer allowed except for HTML generated by WYSIWYG editors.

by mojuba 19y ago

Xichekolas 19y ago

You're right! The W3C has never had an effect on the way the Internet works... (Sorry couldn't resist.) I generally like the idea of moving stuff into CSS, but I think it goes overboard when you have to define stuff in CSS for a unique occurrence... like defining rules for the one div that wraps my whole page. Why can't that just be defined as attributes to that div? Why do I have to put it in a separate place in CSS-land when it's only used for that specific div element? I'm still hoping for someone to come along and make the whole html/css thing sane. It seems awfully hacky now. Cue flame war

bct 19y ago
So put the rules in a style attribute on that one div. That's hardly a reason to clutter HTML up with presentational things.
- mojuba 19y ago
  HTML is presentational in nature, so what's the point of separating presentational attributes from presentational tags? With the current spontaneously emerged HTML standard we have a choice of using or not using separate style declarations, like in imperative programming we may decide to declare and give a name to frequently used constants, macros and functions separately. A library, in other words. Is library obligatory in programming? No. That would be just ridiculous.
- cstejerean 19y ago
  style attributes are no longer allowed in HTML5 except on font. Font is also no longer allowed except for HTML generated by WYSIWYG editors.