- From: (wrong string) äper <christoph.paeper@tu-clausthal.de>
- Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 17:49:45 +0100
- To: <www-html@w3.org>
Sander Tekelenburg: > At 04:16 -0800 UTC, on 1/7/03, Tantek Çelik wrote: > >> so thus we didn't small-caps ABBR (however we did for ACRONYM >> which results in an "Economist" like styling of ACRONYMs). I do that too in many of my stylesheets, plus font-size: 95%; or similar. Changing word- or letter-spacing is also common, but I guess there are differences among styling traditions from different countries. > I don't find anything in CSS 2 that says capitals are not to be > transformed to small-caps. I suppose this is a bug then? No, that is what small-caps is: the small letters look like their big brothers (cap[ital]s), just smaller. Not to confuse with text-transform: uppercase. > I ask myself why the authors of the spec would have > bothered to add an ABBR element at all then? E.g. for aural browser to replace it with the expanded version (maybe gatheres from the title attribute) if appropriate. > Why would the authors of the spec have bothered to create > an element for this? "An"? Why two? Where you need either at least three (+initialism) or only one (abbr) like in current XHTML2. Christoph Päper
Received on Tuesday, 7 January 2003 11:49:33 UTC