- 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