[thelist] CSS Font Sizes, was one more thing about...
Calum I Mac Leod
calum at ciml.co.uk
Tue Feb 27 13:44:52 CST 2001
Aylard JA (James):
> [ calum: ]
> > Using BIG and SMALL as a transitional approach is, IMO, valid (in the
> > general sense as well as the [SG|X]ML sense). I'd quite like to go
Strict
> > for everything, but I'm not inclined to send old browsers to hell and I
> can
> > sympathise with those who don't want to learn what NetExploder4 does
with
> > CSS %.
>
> Remember that <small> and <big> are *not* deprecated, so you can use
> them and still validate with a strict dtd.
Thanks, James. I've tried hard to forget that BIG, SMALL, B and I are in
Strict. It seems to have worked. ;-)
I've always found the following a little odd:
http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/present/graphics.html#h-15.2
"The following HTML elements specify font information.
Although they are not all deprecated, their use is
discouraged in favor of style sheets."
If their use is discouraged, why not deprecate? I looked through the
www-html at w3.org archives a while ago but couldn't find any good reason.
Odd.
Calum
--
More information about the thelist
mailing list