Comments on: How do you include unique styles in a particular blog post? http://blog.dolphinling.net/2005/02/how-do-you-include-unique-styles-in-a-particular-blog-post/ ...whatever goes through my head... Fri, 22 Jan 2010 11:50:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Arve http://blog.dolphinling.net/2005/02/how-do-you-include-unique-styles-in-a-particular-blog-post/comment-page-1/#comment-18 Arve Wed, 16 Feb 2005 15:37:10 +0000 /?p=40#comment-18 <p>You should also note that having <code><a href="data:..." >Link text</a></code> is perfectly legal.</p> <p>But, since you say you're in need of embedding the styled portion within the original: Either inlining it fully, using <code><style></code> in a head section, or the style attribute on the affected elements also "work". At least until you write something in your stylesheet that overrides your current styles. </p> You should also note that having <a href="data:..." >Link text</a> is perfectly legal.

But, since you say you’re in need of embedding the styled portion within the original: Either inlining it fully, using <style> in a head section, or the style attribute on the affected elements also “work”. At least until you write something in your stylesheet that overrides your current styles.

]]> By: dolphinling http://blog.dolphinling.net/2005/02/how-do-you-include-unique-styles-in-a-particular-blog-post/comment-page-1/#comment-17 dolphinling Sat, 12 Feb 2005 00:17:16 +0000 /?p=40#comment-17 <p><code>object</code> is for embedding things that can't be described by the original language (namely (x)html), like images, movies, etc., or aren't considered part of the original document for some other reason. While it's valid and acceptable in some cases to have another (x)html page be that object, in this case it implies (to me) a separation between the original document and the post, when what I <em>want</em> is to have the post be a <em>part</em> of the original document.</p> <p>It also adds another set of html/head/body tags in each post, which changes the semantics quite visibly. And also, it looks really hackish.</p> <p>P.S.: If I'm going to use an <code>object</code>, why do I need to use a data url? I'd rather just have the post be its own page and use an http url. </p> object is for embedding things that can’t be described by the original language (namely (x)html), like images, movies, etc., or aren’t considered part of the original document for some other reason. While it’s valid and acceptable in some cases to have another (x)html page be that object, in this case it implies (to me) a separation between the original document and the post, when what I want is to have the post be a part of the original document.

It also adds another set of html/head/body tags in each post, which changes the semantics quite visibly. And also, it looks really hackish.

P.S.: If I’m going to use an object, why do I need to use a data url? I’d rather just have the post be its own page and use an http url.

]]> By: Anne http://blog.dolphinling.net/2005/02/how-do-you-include-unique-styles-in-a-particular-blog-post/comment-page-1/#comment-16 Anne Fri, 11 Feb 2005 10:29:03 +0000 /?p=40#comment-16 <p>What semantics does it change? I think <code>data:</code> is perfectly acceptable since you can use it to embed complete example pages and you are for sure that when you redesign your site your examples are not messed up. </p> What semantics does it change? I think data: is perfectly acceptable since you can use it to embed complete example pages and you are for sure that when you redesign your site your examples are not messed up.

]]> By: dolphinling http://blog.dolphinling.net/2005/02/how-do-you-include-unique-styles-in-a-particular-blog-post/comment-page-1/#comment-14 dolphinling Fri, 11 Feb 2005 08:15:21 +0000 /?p=40#comment-14 <p>The problem with a data: representation is that it changes the semantics. I want to still have normal (X)HTML semantics, not what an object and a data url implies.</p> <p>I think I was right in what I posted: the best way to go about it is to have each post (that needs one) have its own stylesheet, and the link is dynamically included on every page that includes that post.</p> The problem with a data: representation is that it changes the semantics. I want to still have normal (X)HTML semantics, not what an object and a data url implies.

I think I was right in what I posted: the best way to go about it is to have each post (that needs one) have its own stylesheet, and the link is dynamically included on every page that includes that post.

]]> By: Anne http://blog.dolphinling.net/2005/02/how-do-you-include-unique-styles-in-a-particular-blog-post/comment-page-1/#comment-13 Anne Wed, 09 Feb 2005 09:47:31 +0000 /?p=40#comment-13 <p>The <code>data:</code> thing is a cool suggestion! Perhaps in combination with the <code>OBJECT</code> element or so, so you can also provide alternative content for screen readers. </p> The data: thing is a cool suggestion! Perhaps in combination with the OBJECT element or so, so you can also provide alternative content for screen readers.

]]> By: Arve Bersvendsen http://blog.dolphinling.net/2005/02/how-do-you-include-unique-styles-in-a-particular-blog-post/comment-page-1/#comment-12 Arve Bersvendsen Tue, 08 Feb 2005 19:32:00 +0000 /?p=40#comment-12 <p>Since you don't know in which context you are serving the styles, I'd say that <code><style> is the most compatible way to go.</code></p> <p> you could go about this is by using the <samp>data:</samp> URI scheme, <a href="http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2397.txt">RFC 2397</a>, to include a free-standing HTML representation. However, that would leave IE out in the cold</p> Since you don’t know in which context you are serving the styles, I’d say that <style> is the most compatible way to go.

you could go about this is by using the data: URI scheme, RFC 2397, to include a free-standing HTML representation. However, that would leave IE out in the cold

]]>