W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2007

Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote>

From: Dao Gottwald <dao@design-noir.de>
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2007 13:36:13 +0200
Message-ID: <461A252D.2080303@design-noir.de>
To: Mike Schinkel <w3c-lists@mikeschinkel.com>
CC: public-html@w3.org

Mike Schinkel wrote:
> Dao Gottwald wrote:
>> Mike Schinkel wrote:
>>> Yes, I can use CSS, but indent is such a common need that I end up 
>>> using <blockquote> because it doesn't require me to remember the 
>>> idiosyncrasies of the box model and how it applies to different 
>>> browsers.
>> You think that's a valid reason?
> Is that a rhetorical question?

Yes. I don't think it's a valid reason for a new element.

>>> Providing an <indent> would add zero semantic information
>> ... which directly violates our Design Principles.
> Can you be more specific?

"markup that expresses semantics is usually preferred to purely 
presentational markup" -- So you can't deprecate a semantic element in 
favor of a presentational one.
"HTML Strikes a balance between semantic expressiveness and practical 
usefulness." -- Explicitly removing semantics can't be considered as a 
balance. (I neither think <indent> would be useful.)

>> So you expect accessible browser X to recognize <indent 
>> class="quote"> as a quote?
> Did I say that?  (Asked another way, since when do *browsers* 
> generally recognize semantics in markup?)

I can't tell you the year, but certain browsers have to do that in order 
to present content to disabled users. It can also be important for 
software apart from browsers, like search engines.

Received on Monday, 9 April 2007 11:36:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:18 UTC