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

Re: missing principle

From: Smylers <Smylers@stripey.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 11:01:30 +0100
To: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20070427100130.GA26890@stripey.com>

Daniel Glazman writes:

> Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> 
> > I'd like to hear what new presentational elements are needed.
> 
> I just wanted to say the existing minimal set ... is good to keep.
> 
> On another hand, big and small are bad,

<small> isn't entirely presentational, in that it _can_ be used to
indicate 'small print' or something of lesser importance; sort-of an
opposite of <em>.

It some text should be small just because the designer has decreed that
small text there would look nice, then that's presentational (and
probably should be done in CSS).  But there is meaning in text being
smaller, it is less important than other text on the page, then it would
be good for this to be conveyed in the mark-up, not left to a
presentation layer.

(The same doesn't really apply to <big>, because there are already
things like <em> for emphasizing text, and the phrase "big print"
doesn't really exist; if it means anything it would probably refer
headlines or similar, which would be better in <h1> or something.)

> because handling nested big or small elements is painful in an editor.

I am in no way arguing with that.

Smylers
Received on Friday, 27 April 2007 10:01:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:15:53 GMT