RE: XHTML 2.0 - <line> or <l>?

I agree with Simon and also believe that going from <line> to <l> is a
bad idea... I was surprised myself that the spec did not go with <line>
as I thought it would. In my opinion, it only opens up the possibility
of confusion, which I believed was something the W3C wanted to avoid.
 
As for removing <hr />, I'd also be in favor of that. Maybe it has to do
with the fact that I scarcely use it, but I am in favor of taking out
everything that's not useful - and for me, that element isn't.
 
________________________________________
Denis Boudreau
CYBERcodeur.net - Weblogs et standards Web

-----Original Message-----
From: www-html-request@w3.org [mailto:www-html-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of SCJessey@aol.com
Sent: 24 décembre, 2002 12:54
To: www-html@w3.org
Subject: XHTML 2.0 - <line> or <l>?


I finally got a chance to look over the latest Working Draft for XHTML
2.0 and I was disappointed to see that the <line> element has been
altered to read <l> instead.

Does anyone else think this is a bad idea?  On some text editors, it
looks an awful lot like the old HTML italic tag which will doubtless
cause confusion.

For the record, I'm in favor of removing <hr /> completely rather than
using <separator /> or some other alternative.  It strikes me that the
<section> element renders it rather superfluous.


Simon Jessey
e: scjessey@aol.com
w: http://jessey.net <http://jessey.net/>