Stylesheet vs. HTML tags

[Catherine Lynn Smith]

I notice as I delve deeper into CSS that many property definitions are
redundant between the HTML tags and the CSS properties. I was
wondering if there was a recommended preference as to which to use.
(things such as widths/heights, background colors and images, etc.)

I can see where either or would have benefits depending on how you
wanted to manipulate it, but I can see in some cases where it wouldn't
seem to matter which context you defined it and I was wondering if it
was recommended or preferred to use one or the other or perhaps both?

KL

[Philipp Lenssen]

Catherine Lynn Smith wrote:

I notice as I delve deeper into CSS that many property definitions are
redundant between the HTML tags and the CSS properties. I was
wondering if there was a recommended preference as to which to use.
(things such as widths/heights, background colors and images, etc.)

Ideally, CSS can completely replace layout-HTML3.2, and if possible in
your target-browser, that's always the better way. (If you know why you
are using CSS, then you should also know why this is better.)
Some things cannot be implemented in CSS for certain browsers, and
HTML-workarounds might be your choice (depending how much you/ your
customer cares about certain layout details -- like, getting rid of a
border around a linked image in Netscape 4 via CSS can be tough, and
you might want to have a more relaxed doctype to support a hack --
personally I don't care about Netscape 4 and don't use workarounds on
private pages, but many clients will care).
I can see where either or would have benefits depending on how you
wanted to manipulate it

So where do you see benefits in HTML tags that could be implemented as
CSS? Mostly, they will make the site slower to manage.

By the way, if you are just using inline-styles like <p
style="...">...</p> indeed you might as well stick to "HTML tags" for
layout-definiton.

--
Google Blogoscoped
http://blog.outer-court.com

[Brian]

If you feel you absolutely *must* x-post, please set followups.
(set to ciwas)

Catherine Lynn Smith wrote:

I notice as I delve deeper into CSS that many property definitions
are redundant between the HTML tags and the CSS properties. I was
wondering if there was a recommended preference as to which to use.
Content can only be done with html. Presentation is best done with css.
(things such as widths/heights
Is it content? Image height is best done in HTML, as this is a
content issue, and helps browsers render the document quicker. Is it
to define the width of a paragraph or the margins of a page? That is
presentation, and belongs in css.
background colors and images, etc.)
Background stuff is presentation. Use css.
I can see where either or would have benefits depending on how you
wanted to manipulate it,
I don't see why that would be relevant, except as a content v.
presentation consideration.
but I can see in some cases where it wouldn't seem to matter which
context you defined it
Such as?
and I was wondering if it was recommended or preferred to use one
or the other or perhaps both?

Css is optional. Browsers don't need to consider it. As long as you
don't mistake form for content -- e.g., you may want headings in dark
green and paragraphs centered, but you don't *need* them -- then
perhaps this fact will help you decide.

--
Brian
follow the directions in my address to email me

[Matthias Gutfeldt]

Brian wrote:

If you feel you absolutely *must* x-post, please set followups.
(set to ciwas)

Catherine Lynn Smith wrote:

I notice as I delve deeper into CSS that many property definitions
are redundant between the HTML tags and the CSS properties. I was
wondering if there was a recommended preference as to which to use.

Content can only be done with html. Presentation is best done with css.

Unfortunately (or not) CSS does have a couple properties for content,
see <http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/generate.html>, and of course there are
designers that will use these properties to the fullest extent. Which is
fine for experimental pages, of course.
Matthias

[Stan Brown]

In article <5f**************************@posting.google.com > in
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets, Catherine Lynn Smith
<kl*****@hotmail.com> wrote:

I notice as I delve deeper into CSS that many property definitions are
redundant between the HTML tags and the CSS properties. I was
wondering if there was a recommended preference as to which to use.

Presentational aspects of HTML are deprecated.[1] To deprecate means
"to attempt to ward off by prayer".

Translation: When you have a CSS way available, it's better to use
that than the HTML way for things like fonts, margins, colors, etc.

This is not some airy-fairy abstract "better because it's in the
standard". You the author get a solid benefit: you can set styles
_once_, in a linked stylesheet, rather than have to set them on
every single element. That means that when you want to change some
aspect of your design (NB when, not if), you can change it once
instead of having to edit all of your HTML pages.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/appendi...html#h-A.3.1.2
and http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/appendi...s.html#h-A.3.2

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com/
HTML 4.01 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/
validator: http://validator.w3.org/
CSS 2 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/
2.1 changes: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/changes.html
validator: http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/

[C A Upsdell]

"Catherine Lynn Smith" <kl*****@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5f**************************@posting.google.c om...

I notice as I delve deeper into CSS that many property definitions are
redundant between the HTML tags and the CSS properties. I was
wondering if there was a recommended preference as to which to use.
(things such as widths/heights, background colors and images, etc.)

Use CSS for control of how content should be presented. Add minimal HTML
needed by legacy browsers (mainly NN4) for acceptable presentation.