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

Re: DogFood, take 2

From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 10:44:08 +0200
To: Ben 'Cerbera' Millard <cerbera@projectcerbera.com>
Message-Id: <9450BFB6-C837-44F0-92F7-8718EAD61C49@iki.fi>
Cc: "Sam Ruby" <rubys@us.ibm.com>, "HTMLWG" <public-html@w3.org>

On Dec 13, 2007, at 05:54, Ben 'Cerbera' Millard wrote:

> <acronym title> seems fine to me.
>
> * UAs already support <acronym title>.
> * Replacing every <acronym title> on the web with <abbr title> would  
> probably cost a lot of money.

Fortunately, HTML5 does not require changes to legacy content that is  
left as-is. Unfortunately, this is indeed an issue for aggregating  
markup from different sources some of which live in the legacy.

However, to the extent such aggregator has to remove <font>, it could  
replace acronym with abbr. Is that sillier than removing <font>?

The main benefit of making <acronym> non-conforming is saving people a  
lot of time in the future by eliminating the permathread about what  
should be marked up as <abbr> and what as <acronym>.

> * Allow <u> anywhere similar elements are allowed (such as <i> and  
> <b>). Underlined text may be useful in other situations.


Agreed. (Moreover, the use cases for <m> could probably be achieved  
satisfactorily with <u class='m'> provided that the spec standardizes  
the UA style for <u> so that it is unambiguous how one might undo the  
default styling.)

-- 
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen@iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Thursday, 13 December 2007 08:44:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:51 UTC