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

Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote>

From: Maurice <maurice@thymeonline.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 15:31:58 -0400
To: HTML Working Group <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <C25BBC6E.2339%maurice@thymeonline.com>

> I also think knowing CSS should not be required for marking up a
> document in a manner that is possible using word processor, or that was
> possible when using a typewriter in the pre-computer era.  Why?  Because
> the average non-technical user will learn HTML because it empowers them
> to publish, but the average non-technical user won't go to the extra
> effort to learn the abstractions of CSS, nor will the average user type
> <div style="margin-left:1em;"> when <blockquote> will suffice.


true...but I'm also sure that the average user would want to be able to
controll just how much indentation is given. And if possibly never even
really learn html if they can avoid it. And  I think they should and will
avoid it. I would even encourage them to avoid it. This new era of modern
web development is built upon the concept of separating presentation from
content. 

So if they're not willing to learn CSS... (which is quite simple if you #1
ignore the existance of IE, #2 are taught css by somone who already knows it
instead of following instructions written back when we all were just
figureing it out for the first time.)...then I say they shouldn't learn html
either. Just like they dont have to learn the markup that goes into a word
document.

Do we the authors who have to deal with the content generated by users of
our interactive sites want to have to deal with crap like:
<blockquote><blockquote>Heading text</blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote><blockquote><blockquote>paragraph text </blockquote>


Now, the whatwg proposes 'Sectioning block-level elements' like <section>,
<nav>, <article> etc.
It says it will allow "Zero or more style elements, followed by zero or more
block-level elements."
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/section-sections
.html#sectioning

So, if that's the case then I could imagine in-browser wysiwyg text areas or
any other visual simple editor having predefined css styles that they drop
into the beginning of sectioned areas and when the average user hit's the
'INDENT' button, it simply wraps a div or span around the highlighted area
and assigns the appropriate class name to it.


> There are many people who need to publish content who are not web
> developers.

Indeed, and they do it all the time with Word, quark, pdf, etc....not one of
line of coding mumbo jumbo to write. I cannot use the styling features of of
InDesign without thoughts of CSS running through my head nonstop. I see no
reason why, once we start agreeing on some things around here, and once we
start definine some standard behaviours and assumptions, people making
editors won't be able to easily impliment user friendly style editors that
require zero knowledge of CSS for the aveage person to use. People already
understand the concept of font size, color, typeface, bold, border,
padding/margin. AND I can do things in #$%#$^ PUBLISHER that I still can't
do in CSS (don't remember what but I'm 100% sure that statement is true
somehow.)


> Those with ideologies are so often focused on the absolute application
> of their ideologies that they don't realize they are doing more harm and
> good in their lack of pragmatism. As I've been stating, I agree with
> your goals but I think your rigidity regarding the methods by which
> those goals will be reached will result in a worse situation as opposed
> to a better one.
'ideologies' are why I get banned from #css on every IRC network I've tried
because I wich I could style scrollbars with the same freedom I can style a
<div> :(


> Besides, I'm not at all arguing against WYSIWYG, I'm arguing *for* the
> requirement that HTML be able to reasonably be created with a text
> editor.  I'd further argue that if we get the latter it will be easier
> for people to build the former.

Given a choice between notepad and an easy to use free editor most people
will take the simple editor.

We just need to accept that less and less lay-people will be learning html
even though our work here will make it easier to learn. Because the easier
we make html, and the better the browser vendors support it, the easier it
will be for people who make editors to make great editors that produce great
markup without the user having to learn any html.


> I predict that 25 years from now we'll still be using text.
Yes, "_WE_" will. And peope like us. And people not like us will have some
really awesome visual editors made by people like use using text editors.


...I'm tired of reading this now.
The end
Received on Monday, 30 April 2007 19:32:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:43 UTC