[Bug 11915] Suggestion: Instead of forbidding <u> and inventing <mark> you could as well redefine <u> to be what <mark> is intended for -- roughly the same idea as for <i> and <b>. Clearly not all old HTML4 <i> / <b> / <u> match what the new HTML5 <i> / <b> / <mark>

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11915

Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
                 CC|                            |ian@hixie.ch
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX

--- Comment #2 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> 2011-02-19 00:18:43 UTC ---
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are
satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If
you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please
reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML
Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest
title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue
yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document:
   http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html

Status: Rejected
Change Description: no spec change
Rationale: We considered this, actually. The main reason we didn't do it is
that we're hoping browsers will introduce behaviour for <mark> such as
highlighting the scrollbar, and it's not realistic to do that with <u>.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.

Received on Saturday, 19 February 2011 00:18:49 UTC