W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > May 2003

Re: kelvSYC's Thoughts on the new XHTML Draft

From: fantasai <fantasai@escape.com>
Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 05:56:08 -0400
Message-ID: <3EBB7B38.6000609@escape.com>
To: www-html@w3.org

kelvSYC wrote:
> 
> rev Attribute:
> I don't see the point in having this, when something like rel="reverse" 
> might work. 

Some relationships are more eloquently expressed in reverse.
For example, I haven't been able to come up with a suitable
replacement for rev="description"

> pre Element:
> Looks presentatonal for its example.  I'd say drop it - I don't think it 
> has any semantical relevance.

See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2003Apr/0261.html

> cite Element and Attribute:
> I think the entire citation mechanism needs to be reworked.  What if 
> someone used print (or generally non-internet) citations?  Currently, 
> the cites cannot address this.

Agreed.

> dfn Element:
> I don't get it.

It's the defining instance of a term. You see this a lot in textbooks,
like where the section on Covalent Bonds has a paragraph that begins
A _covalent bond_ is...
(It's in running text--not a definition list.)

> strong Element:
> It's semantically identical to the em element.  Remove it.

It's not identical. The emphasis is stronger in <strong>.

> dl, dt, and dd Elements: [put <dt> & <dd> in container]
> label Element: [add to ol, ul]

Agreed.

~fantasai
Received on Friday, 9 May 2003 05:55:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:55 GMT