They use <del> nowadays, apparently.
They use <del> nowadays, apparently.
s, i, b, etc. aren't really needed, since those can be specified in the styles of the element in which they're contained.Originally Posted by bipper
Tables are still okay for tabular data, but for laying out a page, divs are the standard these days. After you spend some time learning how to use divs in conjunction with CSS to design your page, you'll never want to bother with table layouts again. It's just too bad that people are still using Internet Explorer, which throws web standards out the window and does its own thing, and I have to compensate. Here's hoping IE7 fixes that.
It makes it hard to use them on a case by case basis, the way they're supposed to. Like underlining names or italicizing titles, etc.
.italics{
font-style: italic;
}
<span class="italics">Italicized content</span>
:aimhappy:
But you'll notice. That's a lot longer and just as useful as using <i>
zomp. COMMON SENSE.
Yes but html is supposed to be for markup; css, is granted, for style. There is no reason to take away atributes of HTML that simply markup.
I know you can do them in css, but that doesn't really give the w3c a valid reason for taking them out; imo to say the least.
Bipper
Hey, tell that to the w3c *shrugs*
No. You want COMPLETE control. You want to be able to randomly decide one day that you want all your italicized text to be green and not italicized and only have to change it ONCE, not every time it occurs. Yes, if you're making 1 table for whatever reason you won't need CSS, but if you want a webpage you'll need CSS.
Why would I want to make the titles of poems green @_@
But yet, I see your point. It just doesn't apply to italicized text very well I don't think xD
The idea is to not use elements with inherent properties and to let CSS control everything. What's the difference between "style" and "markup"?
What if you don't want the header or whatever it is your italisizing do be, y'know, italisized in a year or so? What if you want it to be bolded?
Edit: ZeZipster's got it.
Because you become neurotic over night and developed a liking for the color green, obviously.
Anyone with basic knowledge of web design can go to the mall's bookstore, pick up a book on CSS and XHTML, and then learn as they go very easily. They just have to pick a book they can understand.
If your anything like me it would be because you like poems, and Green.Why would I want to make the titles of poems green @_@
...
Style is global for the element it is to contribute to. Markup is single instance of a defined set of properties. The difference is vauge, but there.
HTML should be respected as an older language, and its standard should not depreciate its core reson for exsistanceSeems a little dramatic, but some documents will just be easier if made by pure html, and no css. Taking the choice away is half the mistake, now people will get laughed at or get thier integrity questioned if they are using depreciated tags. If they want to have css affect all the layout and design of html, that seems a little extreme, and i must say I find them out of thier element. If they want that they should encourage the growth of XML and CSS more than changing a set on tradition mark-up language. Tradition may seem like a strong word, but a language that structured the dawn of the web, yeah its tradition.
"Just seems like them young skater punks are trying to rob me of my good html!" - a guy I work with digressing this very toppic with me; he's over 50
bippper
I love it how crash thought I was making some kind of joke until somebody real said it.
Is there like a rumble between rubah, beeper, and sepho on who's the best coder??
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
