[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]


> I've been conflicted about this kind of stuff for a long time, but at
> this point I've concluded that markup takes more forms than XML, and
> that CSS is probably better served by the choice of markup 
> that it made
> than it would be with piles of attributes, even if they were 
> put into a
> CSS namespace or somesuch.

I think there's a difference, though, between this :

<rect 
     style="stroke: black; fill:none;"/>

(which really add any legibility at all) and this:

<path d="
	M 300.75 412.25 
	L 294.75 412.25 
	L 294.75 406.25 
	L 300.75 406.25 
	L 300.75 412.25 
	"
/>

which is much easier to read than if it were split up into
attributes/elements. 

But, as you say, the debate is de facto lost anyhow.  Far be it from the
likes of me to criticize a Recommendation authored by the perfectly enmeshed
(enmashed?) intellects of close to 40 people, some of whom may have been
subtly influenced by the syntax of a certain company's proprietary language.

Dang! That was dripping in sarcasism, wasn't it?   Another timeout for
me....





Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member