[Bug 16600] New: pre is stylistic (typografic) rather than semantic. it always has been. The use-cases should be rewritten so it becomes semantic (What is semantically wrong with using code in a p instead of a pre?) In fact, personally I do not think pre has any semantic

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16600

           Summary: pre is stylistic (typografic) rather than semantic. it
                    always has been. The use-cases should be rewritten so
                    it becomes semantic (What is semantically wrong with
                    using code in a p instead of a pre?) In fact,
                    personally I do not think pre has any semantic
           Product: HTML WG
           Version: unspecified
          Platform: Other
               URL: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#the
                    -pre-element
        OS/Version: other
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: other Hixie drafts (editor: Ian Hickson)
        AssignedTo: ian@hixie.ch
        ReportedBy: contributor@whatwg.org
         QAContact: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
                CC: mike@w3.org


Specification:
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/grouping-content.html
Multipage: http://www.whatwg.org/C#the-pre-element
Complete: http://www.whatwg.org/c#the-pre-element

Comment:
pre is stylistic (typografic) rather than semantic. it always has been. The
use-cases should be rewritten so it becomes semantic (What is semantically
wrong with using code in a p instead of a pre?) In fact, personally I do not
think pre has any semantic value, so why keep it other than the fact it is
used so often? Simply deprecate it. Browsers can still render it so it will
remain backwards compatible?

Posted from: 88.244.70.57
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:11.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/11.0

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://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 Monday, 2 April 2012 10:33:37 UTC