Re: fwd:Fonts

>Alex Hopmann writes:
>> > > A generic character-level text container tag in HTML 3.0 would be
>> > > extremely useful for applying styles to certain blocks of text. I
>> > > propose the following tag:
>> > > 
>> > > <TEXT>...</TEXT>
>> >
>> >This would be very useful indeed, and will talk to Dave Raggett about
>> >it.
>> This seems similar in intent to the <C> tag that I propsed in my character
>> formatting proposal (With the obvious addition of style sheet information).
>> Is that correct? What are the relative merrits of calling it <C> (character)
>> vs. <TEXT>?
>  The only difference I could see is readability (of both the HTML and the
I guess I was thinking that the <C> tag fits in with the concept of
formatting being broken down to Document->Section->Paragraph->Character
(Similar to MS Word). The only real problem I have with <TEXT> is that it
seems almost too general, but maybe that isn't a bad thing. I suppose from
an SGML point of view, <TEXT> could contain pararaphs, and anything else,
whereas you might interpret <C> as something that is not supposed to contain
anything other than possibly other character markup.

Alex Hopmann
ResNova Software, Inc.