Those HTML attributes you never use

Re:Those HTML attributes you never use by ttybird2 on Tuesday April 05, 2022 @03:21AM (#30916202)

You are missing the point. Their issue is that we have two different syntaxes for specifying key-value attributes.

"are you suggesting that CSS and HTML should have the same style? <a style=“color=\”red\””>?"

Probably more like <a css-color="red"> - or alternatively: <a id=xxx> and in an css file: .xxx { href: "http..." }

I also think that you need to chill.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Those HTML attributes you never use by mushyhammer on Thursday April 07, 2022 @02:46AM (#30941384)

What you’re saying was not clear from the start, you keep moving the goalpost.

Ironically XML allowed namespaces so css:color="red" could have totally been a thing. However CSS came out to separate content from style, so doing that wouldn’t have made much sense. I wouldn’t be surprised if the style attribute was added later.

Edit: wow I was right:

> HTML 3.0 supports style sheets via the use of the LINK element [1]

> HTML 4.0 adds new hooks for style sheets, which suggest how a document is presented. The new ID, CLASS, and STYLE attributes [2]

[1]: https://www.w3.org/MarkUp/html3/intro.html

[2]: https://www2.cs.sfu.ca/~ggbaker/reference/wdghtml401/new.htm...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Those HTML attributes you never use by ttybird2 on Friday April 08, 2022 @10:52AM (#30957654)

"you keep moving the goalpost."

This is my first post in this thread... And no, it is not moving any goalpost.

"However CSS came out to separate content from style, so doing that wouldn’t have made much sense"

The first is true, but it does not imply the second.

[ Parent | on HN ]