W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 1997

Re: indents

From: Peter Fraterdeus <peterf@mail.dol.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 01:03:13 -0500
Message-Id: <v03007801af7a16acb502@[206.68.5.85]>
To: Steve Knoblock <knoblock@worldnet.att.net>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
*
What may be the point is that typographers insist that 'white space' is part of the structure, like silence is part of a piece of music.

To ignore this 'decoration' is to miss something essential about the 'data' (structural) or 'language' (semantic/typographic) one is 'presenting'.

After all, it does have to be presented at some point, right? Isn't the whole point of structure to identify elements which inherently require differentiation? Typography, in the visual sense, fills the same role as the spoken word in the aural sense. Should all 'content' be spoken in a monotone? Can the levels of structure be understood at all then? Indenting is the most primary typographic signifier. It is inherently structural. Not decoration!

(I don't indent my email though...too much trouble. But if Eudora supported style sheets, I would ;-)

However, I can see that for automated processes, indexing, hyperlinking, etc., the strict data structuring is meant to keep things simple for the programmer, and thus also for the style-presenting UA. 

Still, the firstness of a paragraph is exactly the reason that it needs special treatment. It relates spacially as well as sequentially to the rest of the content. If we've got first-char and first-line, why not first-para, and first-page?

PF
*

At 10:53 PM -0400 4/15/97, Steve Knoblock wrote:
....
>In direct answer to David's proposal, I don't think structure should make
>typographical sense. Whatever solution is found for typographers to
>decorate their paragraphs, it will have to be outside of structure.
>Hmm...that p:initial pseudo-class is starting to look better and better...
>
>Steve
>
>At 11:50 PM 4/15/97 +0000, you wrote:
>>David Siegel wrote:
>>> Ahah. So maybe it happens that first paragraphs should have a structural
>>> mark-up tag in HTML, one that is STANDARD? While this makes perfect sense
>>> to typographers, I can see how it might take a while to convince
>>> structuralists.
>>
>>Is not the fact that the paragraph is first a sufficient differentiation
>>from the other paragraphs? Why duplicate that information?
>>
>> Paul Prescod

AzByCx DwEvFu GtHsIr JqKpLo MnNmOl PkQjRi ShTgUf VeWdXc YbZa&@

Peter Fraterdeus, designOnline, Inc.
                  dezineCafe / http://www.dol.com      

                  
Received on Wednesday, 16 April 1997 09:32:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:53:49 GMT