W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > April 2011

(unknown charset) Re: Objection to HTMLWG ISSUE-144 Change Proposal #2 (keep u non-conforming)

From: (unknown charset) Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 17:42:46 +0200
To: (unknown charset) www-archive@w3.org, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110406174246448558.7446fd24@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Leif Halvard Silli Tue, 5 Apr 2011 04:15:57 +0200
>> Laura Carlson Mon, 4 Apr 2011 03:07:22 -0500

>> Screenshot of Adobe Dreamweaver CS3 properties menu is attached. It is
>> the file dwproperties.gif .
>> 
>> It offers "B" and  "I" buttons but no "U" button.
>> 
>> The B button produces  the strong element: <strong>B</strong>.
>> The I button produces  the em element: <em>I</em>.

Btw, Laura, you said 'menu', but it looks as a Toolbar. Hence a 
correction: Amaya is identical to Dreamweaver: it provides <strong> 
disguised as [B] and <em> disguised as <i>. 
 
> CKEditor offers U in properties menu. http://ckeditor.com/demo
> 
> So does W3's won Amaya.

What Amaya does is that it divides the phrase elements in 'Info type' 
and 'Character type'. In the first, the 'semantic' elements are found: 
<em>, <strong>, <cite> etc. In the second, the character style elements 
are found: <b>, <i>, <tt>. (See attached images.)

One could ask: now that HTML5 claims that <b> is semantic, should Amaya 
move the <b> over to the Info elements menu? I don't think Amaya's 
users would become any wise by such a move! Because, HTML5's 
'semantification' of <b> and <i> is not a semantification but more a an 
advice about how <b> and <i> could be used wisely. The same kind of 
advice could be provided for <u>.

Leif H Silli


InfoElementsAmaya.jpg
(image/jpeg attachment: InfoElementsAmaya.jpg)

CharElementsAmaya.jpg
(image/jpeg attachment: CharElementsAmaya.jpg)

Received on Wednesday, 6 April 2011 15:43:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:18:35 GMT