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

RE: Magic Elements (was: kelvSYC's Thoughts on the new XHTML Draft)

From: Jelks Cabaniss <jelks@jelks.nu>
Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 22:44:01 -0400
To: <www-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <003201c31767$2e24a650$6501a8c0@blackie>

Tantek wrote:

>> There's a new removal error about to happen: <q>.  Just as there may
>> be difficulties in edge cases of <ol start="0">, there may be some
>> with <q> in some i18n contexts, but is throwing the baby out with
>> the bathwater warranted here?
 
>> No objections to adding <quote>, but I think the removal of <q> is a
>> major mistake.

> Ok, that much is clear, but are you proposing to:
> a. keep <q> as it is in HTML4 (I think this is a bad idea, since
> <q> has been shown to be problematic to completely _properly_
> implement). 

As is <ol> with 'start' and 'value'.  

> b. keep <q> but deprecate it

c. Keep <q> and *recommend* its use (where appropriate).


	He said, <quote>"I'm stuck with hardcoded ugly quotes
	but I can be used by anybody in the world if they 
	really want to go to that much trouble!"</quote>

	Smiling at his boorishness, she replied, <q>I can't
	be deeply nested, and I only work well in a Gringo-
	Eurotrash world, but I'm a heck of a lot better 
	looking than you are.</q>

	Ambling hand-in-hand (they were, after all, soulmates)
	off into the sunset, he sweetly (and un-marked-up-edly)
	murmured, &ldquo;We DO make a beautiful couple, don't 
	we?&rdquo;


/Jelks
Received on Saturday, 10 May 2003 22:44:25 GMT

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