On 22 June 2015 at 20:20, Peter Kelly <pmke...@apache.org> wrote: > > On 23 Jun 2015, at 1:10 am, Franz de Copenhague <fr...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > <p class="Strong" id="word253" style="corinthia-outline-level:2"> > > <span id="word259">This is a paragraph Strong with outline level > 2</span> > > </p> > > > > Or > > > > <p class="Strong" id="word253" data-corinthia-outline-level=2"> > > <span id="word259">This is a paragraph Strong with outline level > 2</span> > > </p> > > Of these two, I think that the CSS property would be the better choice. > The main reason is that we could use it in both style definitions *and* > inline style attributes; that is, it would be consistent. As Jan mentioned, > this would allow us to maintain information about heading levels greater > than 6, while still having fully valid HTML and CSS. > > It’s my understanding that it’s pretty widely accepted practice to add > vendor prefixes to CSS properties, so this shouldn’t pose a problem. I > think it’s usually done with a leading - though, so we could have > -corinthia-outline-level=N > +1 to your naming scheme, there was some talks about 2 years ago, about standardizing the names (giving you a possibility to register the vendor name).
rgds jan i > > — > Dr Peter M. Kelly > pmke...@apache.org > > PGP key: http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key <http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key> > (fingerprint 5435 6718 59F0 DD1F BFA0 5E46 2523 BAA1 44AE 2966) > >
