- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 02:11:58 +0200
- To: Karl Dubost <karl@la-grange.net>, www-archive@w3.org
Leif Halvard Silli, Wed, 6 Apr 2011 17:59:40 +0200: > Leif Halvard Silli, Wed, 6 Apr 2011 17:41:46 +0200: > But ... hm ... Performing the Google translation is interesting: the > resulting underline, in English, doesn't add meaning. And, I think that > indicates that <u> is correct - relatively speaking (because I think > punctuation is 'correctest'). The thing about using lower combining underline characters instead is that they do not cover the entire width of the character/sign. So when a word is written with more than one sign, then - ulike using <u> or CSS - it doesn't create the correct effect. So, if it is the case that it *should* have been solved as a diacritic, then at least it doesn't create the intended result. I got confirmation on this from a translator friend. -- leif halvard silli
Received on Thursday, 7 April 2011 00:12:27 UTC