- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2011 05:06:14 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11915 Summary: 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> Product: HTML WG Version: unspecified Platform: Other URL: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#top OS/Version: other Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: HTML5 spec (editor: Ian Hickson) AssignedTo: ian@hixie.ch ReportedBy: contributor@whatwg.org QAContact: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org CC: mike@w3.org, public-html-wg-issue-tracking@w3.org, public-html@w3.org Specification: http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html Section: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#top Comment: 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> will be, but as this is no serious problem for <i> and <b> it should be also no serious problem for <u>. There are many appplications offering I + B + U, e.g., forum software and simple "HTML" input in comment forms. For some use cases <mark> would require 13 keystrokes, where <u> only needs 7. Personally I'm no fan of the old <u> and would not miss it, but you could specify a good new <u> instead of <mark>. - Frank <mailto:hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com> Posted from: 82.113.121.49 -- 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, 29 January 2011 05:06:16 UTC