Re: <br> as paragraph separator

I have re-opened HTML5 bug 10828 with a
comment<http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10828#c39>
explaining
that a part of the reasons for filing the bug is out of date. I made no
recommendation for what impact the new information should have and did not
ask for a change.

I think that the best forum for further discussion is the HTML5
bug<http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10828>
.

Aharon

On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 10:52 AM, Aharon (Vladimir) Lanin <aharon@google.com
> wrote:

> Without a doubt, this has to be brought to the attention of Ian.
>
> I intend to do so after bringing the issue to discussion at the W3C i18n WG
> meeting this week. The HTML5 bug was filed under the WG's auspices, so it
> would be best that the WG express an opinion on the matter.
>
> Although I will abide by the majority decision, I still believe that <br>
> as a paragraph separator is best. Although the HTML spec demands that <br>
> be "used only for line breaks that are actually part of the content, as in
> poems or addresses" and "not be used for separating thematic groups in a
> paragraph", its "abuse" is rampant. That's because in certain scenarios it
> is much easier to use than the recommended alternatives, and because it
> works fine - until the applications has to support bidi text. Then,
> suddenly, <br>'s bidi whitespace behavior starts to cause problems for bidi
> users. Getting the app to stop using <br> at that point is an uphill battle,
> since it is perceived as a great inconvenience for the benefit of a
> "marginal use case" (bidi). I do not want the battle for HTML purism to be
> waged entirely at the expense of bidi users.
>
> Aharon
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 4:51 AM, "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp
> > wrote:
>
>> On 2010/12/16 8:23, Asmus Freytag wrote:
>>
>>  When the story was, "oh, nobody implements it correctly anyway" that
>>> provided a lot more leeway to bring the standard inline with practice.
>>> That leeway is now gone.
>>>
>>
>> That wasn't the story. The story was something like "Mozilla does it
>> correctly, but IE does it wrong, and won't change, so we have to change to
>> IE's ways". So there is even less leeway.
>>
>> Anyway, we should bring all these things to the attention of the HTML
>> folks, in particular Ian. They have their own ideas on <br> and they have
>> their own guidelines on how to treat things with certain implementation
>> conformance. Also, they will know how 'strict' is supposed to relate to
>> HTML5.
>>
>> As for TR 20, I think we still need to change something. Because current
>> browser implementation varies, we can at least for the current time not stay
>> with the simple "LS is just a <br>".
>>
>> Regards,   Martin.
>>
>> --
>> #-# Martin J. Dürst, Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
>> #-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp   mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp
>>
>
>