At 11:10 2003 01 20 -0800, Bob Stayton wrote: >On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 01:21:43PM -0500, Norman Walsh wrote: >> There are more and more bug reports coming in of the form >> >> "Why are you doing X? You should be using CSS." >> >> For example, <b> elements in figure titles, background color on >> tables, etc. Even the inline style markup in admonitions falls into >> this category as, if we relied on CSS, we'd expect an external >> stylesheet to apply that style. >> >> Historically, the stylesheets have tried to walk some sort of a line >> between relying on CSS and getting reasonable results in browsers that >> don't support CSS. >> >> Is it time to move that line farther out, removing things that could >> be done with CSS and just expecting CSS to be used? > >I think this is ok. > >I'm concerned about the transition. >If we are expecting CSS to be used, would we supply a >basic CSS stylesheet that implements these changes and gives >people the framework for customizing?
Bob seems to be inferring that Norm's message implies a standalone stylesheet. But CSS use can happen in three levels: 1. in the style attribute 2. in the <style> element 3. in a separate stylesheet. There are extra problems with managing standalone stylesheets (much as I appreciate the benefits of separating content and style). I'm not sure what Norm's message was implying--Norm, can you elaborate? paul