W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2008

Re: Emphasizing STRIKE

From: gonchuki <gonchuki@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 16:49:37 -0200
Message-ID: <8320a9390802071049q2bf21e64o125f74d66d5acd2f@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Leif Halvard Silli" <lhs@malform.no>
Cc: HTMLWG <public-html@w3.org>

On Feb 7, 2008 4:27 PM, Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no> wrote:
> gonchuki 08-02-07 06.46:   ­
> > On Feb 7, 2008 12:10 AM, Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no> wrote:
> > > For instance, a typical example could be  that the holder of a document
> > > changed name or something, and that the old name was striked over.
> >
> > Then the old name is actually <del>eted and the new name <ins>erted
> >
>
> To do as you propose,
> <del>old name</del> new name
> is non-semantic. You are merely using DEL to create the effect of
> stricken text. The correct thing, if your task is to document the
> editing process, would be
> <del>old name</del><ins><strike>old name</strike> new name</ins>
> Since the purpose is not to document the editing process, it is enough with
> <strike>old name</strike> new name
>
> STRIKE can best be interpreted as a command - as an imperrative: STRIKE
> this, ignore what it says. STRIKE is text that is not deleted, but whose
> message should still be ignored. Whereas DEL contains info about
> something that has allready been deleted, but which still is given heed.
>

complete nonsense, <del>old name</del> actually DOES mean "ignore
this, as it has been deleted in favor of this <ins>new name</ins>".
"old name" is NOT an insertion in the document, your <ins>+<strike>
example is broken.
the correct semantics for this case is:
<del cite="http://www.foobar.com/blog/old_name_gets_new_name"
datetime="2008-02-07T16:35:07-03:00">old name</del><ins
datetime="2008-02-07T16:36:00-03:00">new name</ins>

> > could you please elaborate on the meaning of the <strike> element
> > other than its visual representation?
>
> Strike means "invalidated".  It is like stamp on the text. Just because
> as stamp says «ivalid» does not mean that you can just throw the
> document away. Instead, you need the info about the fact that this is
> now invalid. DEL cannot mean «invalidated» because it refers to a
> document in process. DEL appears in texts that have yet to be made valid
> in the first place.
>

again, a final document doesn't contain "invalid text", it's FINAL,
and that means everything appearing there is a valid statement. If you
need a "smaller" version of the cite attribute then it would be good
suggesting an additional let's say "reason" attribute for the author
to concisely elaborate on reason for deletion.
remember that the <del> tag deletes nothing at all, it's markup to
identify sections of text that changed or are to be discarded on the
final document.

> > You are insisting on its
> > "semantic" purpose without yet explaining how it gives different
> > meaning than the <del> element,
>
> STRIKE tells that that the fact to which the text refers, has undergone
> history, so that the messag of this text is now invalid. DEL/INS are
> used to tell that the _text_ has undergone history. The content of DEL
> does not need to be invalid. It can be just another way to phrase the
> same meaning.
>
> These are two very different semantic fields.

the contents of <del> tell me: "hey, I'm not useful anymore, please
delete me when you please".
the contents of <strike> on the contrary say: "hey, I'm a piece of
stroked text, but I don't know why"

> > and please don't insist on final
> > documents as no final document contains unprofessional stroked text.
> >
>
> Finalized documents contain both uprofessonal stroked and underlined
> text. Many documents are also «live», where things are added through
> time. Stricken text in such documents represens undeletable text with
> reference function, but which generally should be ignored. In the
> Bugzilla example, stricken text tells that you can ingore this bug report.
>
> For unsighted users of Bugzilla, I think there is currently nothing that
> tells you that the bug can be ignored. I am thinking about e.g. the
> «Related bugs» section, where both unsoved and solved bugs appears side
> by side.

don't know about the exact Bugzilla implementation, but wording tells
you that a bug is solved when one writes "bug #799 resolved on
changeset [1350]", you don't need any extra visual clue to know what
it means, it's self-explanatory text and an unsighted user also gets
it. Extra markup would just be for bots and spiders collecting data on
solved bugs on a specific report, and a plain <strike> does not carry
enough information to explain its meaning.
moreover, a "live" document is not final, it's an open document under
editing. Try not to confuse usage scenarios.

--
Gonzalo Rubio
Received on Thursday, 7 February 2008 18:49:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:52 UTC