- From: Mikko Rantalainen <mira@cc.jyu.fi>
- Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2003 14:04:15 +0300
- To: www-html@w3.org
William F Hammond / 2003-04-04 16:34: > > [Reply narrowed to www-html and www-style; followup to www-html] > > If <br/> is discarded, then <l></l> will see frequent use by billions > of web masters. How hard it's to understand? <br/> inserts a line break whereas <l></l> (or <l/>) inserts both start of line and end of line so there'll be an empty line. Perhaps the spec should define or at least suggest that empty l(ine) element isn't allowed to collapse to zero height line? Hopefully content authors will fall back to <p> as it's shorter to write and they've probably heard about that one before and it results to the same default rendering. If they want similar rendering as with <br> they need to put something inside l(ine) element which is exactly the target of the spec. The <br> and the proposed &ls; (and &ps;) are way too easy to abuse. -- Mikko
Received on Saturday, 5 April 2003 06:03:43 UTC