> Hmm, does that mean that all HTML 3.0 browsers have to implement style
> sheet's? I thought that was considered a bad idea.
No they aren't required to support style sheets, and if they don't then
the situation is as it is with HTML 2.0 - that is you get the default
numbering style defined by the browser and/or the user's preferences.
I expect the advantages gained from implementing style sheet support
will be so great that *all* browsers will do this, once, we have settled
on standard style notations. Note that authors don't have to use separate
style sheets, as all the style info can be placed in the STYLE element in
the document's head.
> The good thing about the numbering style attributes was, it made conversion
> from wordprocessor and DTP packages much easier.
Today conversion from wordprocessor and DTP packages loses much of the style
info. So these filters will be written to exploit HTML style sheets as
soon as we have a consensus on the de facto notations.
> This is important. If the original document refers to "the problem with
> option d" the relevant list should be numbered a b c d e not 1 2 3 4 5
> I have no problem with stylesheets optionally changing the formatting - like,
> I want the little a b and c in my list to be in 10 point dark grey Corrina,
> or whatever; but I feel it should be possible to express the meaning without
> a stylesheet.
Given that style sheet support is expected to become widespread, I felt that
the added complexity for HTML in fully describing the numbering style wasn't
justified at this point. Remember that we are not just talking about list
items, as numbered headings and possibly numbered paragraphs also need to
be considered.
This is something for the working group to discuss, though.
-- Dave Raggett <[email protected]> tel: +44 117 922 8046 fax: +44 117 922 8924
Hewlett Packard Laboratories, Filton Road, Bristol BS12 6QZ, United Kingdom