[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [docbook] strict versus transitional XHTML tables
I must have transitioned to an alternate universe while I wasn't paying attention. An argument on the docbook mailing list about including background color in table elements? Did DocBook start marketing itself to graphic designers while I was sleeping? Do CALS tables have "bgcolor" attributes? Has CSS become deprecated for DocBook users? W3C issued a statement: "Everybody should use CSS, except for those presentation-crazy DocBook authors"? It has (to my experience) _always_ been challenging to generate stylish documentation with DocBook. Adding a "bgcolor" attribute is like offering a starving child a couple of seeds for growing grain. If we're concerned about making DocBook more presentation-friendly in the HTML space, then we should be talking about making certain that the generated HTML can be tied into CSS in a predictable and intuitive fashion, ideally with good tool support, rather than about adding deprecated HTML attributes to DocBook. -- John R. Daily <email><mailbox>john</mailbox><domain>geekhavoc.com</domain></email>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]