Re: My comments on the XHTML 2 draft.

From: Philip TAYLOR [PC335/O-XP] <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2002 17:39:25 +0100
Message-ID: <3D78DA3D.3470342@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
To: "William F. Hammond" <hammond@math.albany.edu>
CC: Lachlan Cannon <luminosity@members.evolt.org>, www-html@w3.org

I was not arguing against the use of <em> within <em>,
but rather against the misuse of <em> where (a variant
of) <quote> is required.  The LaTeX example is clearly
artificial, but realistic examples can easily be created.

** Phil.
--------
William F Hammond wrote:

[snip]

> Doesn't it depend on whether XHTML, version 2, is to be (A) a clone of
> a fine-grained document type such as TEI.2 -- in which case probably
> yes -- or (B) a generalized layout document type, with content level
> modeling of abstract_layout_ -- in which case I would like to cite a
> working LaTeX excerpt from the LaTeX Project's
>
>                 <eval>kpsewhich sample2e.tex</eval>
>
> (with a small modification):
>
>      \documentclass{article}
>      \begin{document}
>
>      In printing, text is usually emphasized with an
>             \emph{italic}
>      type style.
>
>      \emph{
>         A long segment of text can also be emphasized
>         in this way.  Text within such a segment can be