W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2001

Re: Fw: Disturbing trend in tables

From: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 14:04:15 +0000 (GMT)
Message-Id: <200101211404.f0LE4FV24498@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> I'm not sure I understand.  If I wanted to make something underlined,
> italic, or bold 6 years ago, David, what code was I supposed to
> use?  Surely you're not suggesting I should have been using CSS
> back in 1994?

I think the other reply gives good reasons why you shouldn't be
thinking italics, but this is the actual quote from the July 1993
draft RFC for HTML 2:

    Some of these styles are more explicit than others about
    how they should be physically represented.  The logical
    styles should be used wherever possible, unless for example
    it is necessary to refer to the formatting in the text.
    (Eg. "The italic parts are mandatory".)

That makes it at least nearly seven and a half years since the use of
the physical ones was proposed to be discouraged.
Received on Sunday, 21 January 2001 15:03:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:53 GMT