comment on

This will probably get castigated for being OT - but maybe this deep in a related thread it won't get noticed:)

Has anyone an opinion or a reference as to why the powers that be opted to require the use of class="someclass" for css/css2/XML?

It struck me in my recent work with CGI/XML::Simple (see, it's Related!:) that 'they' missed a trick here. Instead of:

<html><head><style>
.someclass {
...
}
</style></head><body>
...
<div class="someclass">This text has some class!</div>
...
</body></html>
[download]

Wouldn't it have been simpler, cleaner etc. to allow:

<html><head><style>
someclass {
...
}
</style></head><body>
...
<someclass>This text has some class!</someclass>
...
</body></html>
[download]

That is to say: Why not allow the browser to render the XML directly in the browser by attaching the css directly to the XML tagged data?

I appreciate that this is a meta discussion.. and do not expect an "answer" as such - but if anyone knows or has an opinion I would be interested to hear it.

In reply to Re: Re: TT2 -- A Matter of Style by BrowserUk
in thread TT2 -- A Matter of Style by DamnDirtyApe

Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big> <blockquote> <br /> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <font> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr /> <i> <li> <nbsp> <ol> <p> <small> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <table> <td> <th> <tr> <tt> <u> <ul>
Snippets of code should be wrapped in <code> tags not <pre> tags. In fact, <pre> tags should generally be avoided. If they must be used, extreme care should be taken to ensure that their contents do not have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor intervention).
Want more info? How to link or How to display code and escape characters are good places to start.


Perl Monk, Perl Meditation
	PerlMonks