- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 19:10:29 +0300
- To: Patrick H.Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Cc: www-html@w3.org
On Apr 23, 2007, at 18:51, Patrick H. Lauke wrote: > Quoting Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>: > >> You seem to be assuming that semantic markup is good for the sake of >> semantics. I see semantic markup as merely a means to achieve media >> independence. > > In that case our views diverge at quite a fundamental point, then. OK. Do you believe that semantic markup is important for its own sake? Why? >> The reality is that normal people don't want to encode >> the reason why they italicized something. They just want to select >> some >> text, hit ctrl-i or command-i and be done with it. > > How do you know what people want, when up to now there hasn't been > a choice for them? OpenOffice.org Writer/Web does provide the choice albeit the alternative to generic italicizing is less convenient. But having to choose from multiple semantic ways of italicizing is necessarily less convenient than just italizing. > Given a like-for-like comparison, with an editor that gives them > appropriate options to mark something up correctly (genus, > shipname, etc), i'd be interested to see what "normal people" do. I'd love to be proven wrong by someone designing, shipping and sustaining a mass-market semantic editor. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Monday, 23 April 2007 16:11:14 UTC