You're right! The W3C has never had an effect on the way the Internet works...
(Sorry couldn't resist.)
I generally like the idea of moving stuff into CSS, but I think it goes overboard when you have to define stuff in CSS for a unique occurrence... like defining rules for the one div that wraps my whole page. Why can't that just be defined as attributes to that div? Why do I have to put it in a separate place in CSS-land when it's only used for that specific div element?
I'm still hoping for someone to come along and make the whole html/css thing sane. It seems awfully hacky now.
HTML is presentational in nature, so what's the point of separating presentational attributes from presentational tags?
With the current spontaneously emerged HTML standard we have a choice of using or not using separate style declarations, like in imperative programming we may decide to declare and give a name to frequently used constants, macros and functions separately. A library, in other words. Is library obligatory in programming? No. That would be just ridiculous.
(Sorry couldn't resist.)
I generally like the idea of moving stuff into CSS, but I think it goes overboard when you have to define stuff in CSS for a unique occurrence... like defining rules for the one div that wraps my whole page. Why can't that just be defined as attributes to that div? Why do I have to put it in a separate place in CSS-land when it's only used for that specific div element?
I'm still hoping for someone to come along and make the whole html/css thing sane. It seems awfully hacky now.
Cue flame war