Harry Roberts—Big CSS

It's not clear to me what you are trying to say. Accessibility issues have to logically start somewhere. Do you understand what the wanted effect is? Because I'm pretty sure the gist of this entire discussion is: Don't use inline styles, which any front-end developer worth their salt would already agree to[1], outside of the accessibility debate. But what is more, accessibility might be one of many reasons why a front-end developer would raise the point about inline style at all. [1] ▶ this video

??? 1. Code bloat: "font-family: Crimson Text; font-size: 20px; font-weight: 400; line-height: 135%;" appears 9 times. For the same reason in the CSS world we're trying to eliminate unnecessary and unwieldy div-itis and non-semantic classes. It's about reducing footprint: ▶ this video If you cannot see the logical next step that each of his Web pages may be doing the exact same thing, and thus his entire site; and further he might be using a plugin or theme that perpetuates this bad practice... if you cannot see that, then fair. But those are the kinds of problems I reflect on in my studies. 2. I'm not even sure what you're getting at with your second question. I wouldn't be posting this if my "!important" worked. If anything, Stylish may not benefit from the well-noted point that !important overrides inline styles. If that's the case: fascinating new problem we've discovered here. I am overriding paragraph elements with "!important"; that is the fact of the situation. Is there a technical problem? Perhaps. 3. Fontwalls are situations like this: a dyslexic reader is incapable of reading the content in place because the typesetting makes it inaccessible. So, like with your criticism of my typesetting on my Website: the OP has used "a typeface that is exceedingly difficult to read."