Posted by Neredbojias on 05/06/06 13:00

To further the education of mankind, Toby Inkster <usenet200605
@tobyinkster.co.uk> vouchsafed:

> Neredbojias wrote:
>
>> I agree. The w3c should definitely _not_ have removed the target
>> attribute from strict.
>
> Why pollute Strict with everyone's pet elements and attributes? Strict is
> supposed to be vehicle for complete separation of markup and styling/
> behaviour.

I agree with that, but determining a window is markup to me, not styling.
And even if it were styling, there should have been an attribute in css
_before_ they axed the html "target". The new standards are supposed to
facilitate making viable pages, not inhibit their creation which is what
seems to be happening more and more the more I see.

> If you want the other cruft, then Transitional exists and it's not going
> to go away any time soon.

What's a "cruft"?

--
Neredbojias
Infinity has its limits.

[Back to original message]