Jough wrote:

> True, but unlike 'row' and 'col' for textarea which are required, all
> attributes you have mentioned are implied [1].  What makes these different?
> I agree that there should be NO presentation attributes in XHTML strict, but
> if we are to have some why would they be required?
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd 

Ah, you're right, forgot about that...that's even worse, definitely. And 
yes, based on the definition of those attributes, there's really nothing 
beyond the presentation intended

"This attribute specifies the number of visible text lines. [...] This 
attribute specifies the visible width in average character widths."

Maybe somebody from the W3C HTML list could enlighten us as to why these 
attributes were kept as required? Is it just for backwards compatibility?

P
-- 
Patrick H. Lauke
__________________________________________________________
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]
www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
http://redux.deviantart.com 
__________________________________________________________
Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force
http://webstandards.org/ 
__________________________________________________________