- From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 16:31:20 +0100
- To: "David Carlisle" <davidc@nag.co.uk>, public-html@w3.org
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 16:26:09 +0100, David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
wrote:
> All of the above document types are commonly used for authoring and
> converted to HTML for display. the propsoal to restrict the content
> model for div but not follow XHTML2 in opening up the content model for
> p makes that conversion significantly harder, and makes the resulting
> HTML significantly less structurally useful as you need to introduce
> spurious paragraphs together with extra CSS styling to supress any
> typographic display that would normally be associated with a paragraph.
I agree with your reasoning, however you ignore some important factors
here:
1. text/html is not able to express blocks in Ps.
2. The vast majority of the Web is text/html.
3. Having different content model rules for text/html and XML is utterly
confusing for authors.
Furthermore, the style sheet to not indent block followed by P is simply:
p + p { text-indent:3em; }
--
Simon Pieters
Opera Software
Received on Thursday, 13 December 2007 15:31:38 UTC