Mind you, CSS is conveniently brief to write...
Sigurd Magnusson | Operations Director
SilverStripe
http://www.silverstripe.com
|
Level 3, Symes De Silva House 97-99 Courtenay Place Wellington, New Zealand |
 |
> Matthew Smith wrote:
>>
>> A question that's been on my mind for quite some time - why is CSS in
>> such a whacky format?
>>
>
> CSS1 was designed in pre-XML times ('96), which is why we have CSS's
> half-assed XPath (CSS Selectors) and namespaces. It's also why CSS is
> it's own weird-ass syntax.
>
> My personal opinion is that when CSS2 came out it should have been
> XMLised because CSS1 wasn't a significant legacy (even then, browsers
> could have been instructed to parse both). CSS1 didn't even have
> layout, aside from floats, and people hadn't invested nearly as much
> in it.
>
>
> .Matthew Cruickshank
> http://docvert.org << Freely convert MS Word to HTML or any XML
>
>
> *******************************************************************
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *******************************************************************
>
>
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
