Subject: Re: Questions about our XML grammar
From: Randy Kramer (rhkramer@fast.net)
Date: Wed Jan 10 2001 - 09:25:54 CST
Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
>
> At 3:05 PM -0800 1/9/01, Paul Rohr wrote:
> > >* Is there a reason we call it "props" rather than "style"? Yes, it
> > >is our properties, but it's also similar to CSS style values.
> >
> >Two reasons.
> >
> >1. We didn't want to suggest full CSS compatibility everywhere.
>
> That makes sense and it isn't that big a deal, but was
> wondering if there was a reason.
Well, OK, but:
1. Props is non-intuitive, especially for our favorite target client.
(You know, the church secretary.) (And, for me.)
2. I don't think CSS invented "styles" -- I don't think Word did either,
but I think they've been using "styles" since Word 3 (1983?), or
earlier.
Randy Kramer
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Wed Jan 10 2001 - 09:27:39 CST