On 18/10/05, Christian Montoya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That being said, class "img" is a poor naming convention. Something
> like "imgleft" would have made more sense.
Not, it wouldn't. Naming an element with his format is even worse
than using names of classes like elements.
Using like "wi" (which would stand for "with image") would be
really better, since it tells the important information (that the dd
has an image inside) without relying in the current behavior of the
element -- since it can change in a redesign, or something.
Amplexos.
--
diego nunes
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
