W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2005

RE: [TECHS] Techniques Issues for Guideline 1.3 - plain text version

From: Joe Clark <joeclark@joeclark.org>
Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 16:23:24 +0000 (UTC)
To: WAI-GL <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.60.0505041622080.23060@aristotle.multipattern.com>

> For what it's worth, my proposal for 3.1 includes a L3 success criterion
> about providing a mechanism to identify main ideas and other important
> content (I know, "main" and "important" are fuzzy).

We don't have an <important> element in HTML.

> I bring it up here because it occurred to me that this might actually be 
> the sort of thing that <em> was designed for-- not as a substitute for 
> <i>, but as a way to mark substantial pieces of content that need to be 
> emphasized.

That won't work, as <em> is merely an inline element.
This proposal contradicts and would render illegal the everyday and 
considered usage of <em> by the people who really know what they're doing, 
standardistas.

-- 

     Joe Clark | joeclark@joeclark.org
     Accessibility <http://joeclark.org/access/>
       --This.
       --What's wrong with top-posting?
Received on Wednesday, 4 May 2005 16:23:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 23:39:37 UTC