On Tue, 15 Apr 2008, Shannon wrote:
All of them. class isn't intended for styling, it's intended to
subclass elements.
Regardless of the intention of the class element it is NOT used in the
real world to subclass anything but styles and custom script. We may
wish otherwise but that is
Ironically (given that you proposed using rel= instead) as far as I know
Google has never based anything on class values, but has used rel=
values (like rel=nofollow).
Which indicates to me that they were concerned enough about
class=nofollow to not use it. I personally think that nofollow
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008, Shannon wrote:
It's alternative because it attempts to actually classify something
rather than generically label it. I agree that class should only do the
first and I do this with my own code but most designers do not. As far
as the web design world is concerned class
Ian Hickson wrote:
We're not talking about making class meaningful. I'm not sure I understand
what you are arguing against at this point.
The proposal is just that authors should use class= to distinguish the
various ways they use i so that they can (e.g.) style them differently.
Where is
On Wed, 16 Apr 2008, Shannon wrote:
Ian Hickson wrote:
We're not talking about making class meaningful. I'm not sure I
understand what you are arguing against at this point.
The proposal is just that authors should use class= to distinguish
the various ways they use i so that they
I seemed to have missed these when going through the cite e-mails
recently.
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005, John Lewis wrote:
A way to mark up titles is something I've always wanted in HTML.
Currently, cite is only appropriate for actual citations. I rarely
cite books, movies, etc.; I'm usually just
If we go with something like a TYPE attribute, I hope we can give it a
better name. However, hiding semantics inside the value of an
attribute is a poor markup design in humble opinion. (Although it also
has some advantages.)
It's subclassing: the general is sufficient, the specific
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008, Shannon wrote:
I've seen a few suggestions now that class be used as an identifying
attribute for purposes other than CSS. While this seems logical it
raises some issues for designers and implementers. Consider the
following:
cite class=small book blueThe
All of them. class isn't intended for styling, it's intended to subclass
elements.
Regardless of the intention of the class element it is NOT used in the
real world to subclass anything but styles and custom script. We may
wish otherwise but that is irrelevant. The value of class to me is:
