Posted by Neredbojias on 10/06/05 23:40

With neither quill nor qualm, Matt Probert quothed:

> On Thu, 6 Oct 2005 08:26:15 -0700, Neredbojias
> <neredbojias@neredbojias.com> wrote:
>
> > Hey, I don't think the w3c is always rational, either. But what's so
> > traumatic about using css instead of html? It seems to me that css is
> > more versatile if a little clunky, and it does more as far as stylizing
> > goes.
>
> CSS instead of HTML ? You mean separate CSS styles rather than
> embedding the styles inline into the HTML, surely?

Of course. I thought it was, uh, obvious.

>
> Matt
>
> --
> The Probert Encyclopaedia - Beyond Britannica
> http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com
>

--
Neredbojias
Contrary to popular belief, it is believable.

[Back to original message]