W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > September 2002

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
>         given \emph{additional} emphasis.
>      }
> 
>      \end{document}
> 
>                                     -- Bill
Received on Friday, 6 September 2002 12:39:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:52 GMT