Re: missing principle

On Apr 27, 2007, at 1:23 AM, Daniel Glazman wrote:

> I think we miss one principle about the ubiquity of HTML. HTML is not
> only used in web browsers. It's used in email and there are more
> HTML-based email authors than Web page authors, it's used to design  
> and
> print books, it's used for messages in interserver communications.
> Editability of HTML is also a key issue. Designing cool and powerful
> features is one thing, making them editable and therefore reachable by
> the masses is another one.

Apple has many non-browser uses of HTML, including a mail client. So  
I agree with the sentiment and I'd be glad to add such a thing. Do  
you have a suggested phrasing?

> As a side note to our conf call yesterday, I spent the last fifteen
> years saying a few basic presentational elements are abolutely needed
> despite of the "theoretically pure" view of separation between content
> and presentation. Just like the style attribute.
> After I heard Murray yesterday, I just wanted it to be clear I support
> his comments about it entirely.

Our "Separation Of Concerns" principle says that markup should be  
designed to *allow* separation of content and presentation, not that  
it should force it. And it specifically mentions that elements with a  
defined default presentation for various relevant media may be  
sufficient. So our design principles would be ok with adding more  
presentational elements, though they would also be ok with not adding  

Personally, though, I'd like to hear what new presentational elements  
are needed. Do you have a proposed list?

Personally, I think <font> restricted to use by WYSYWIG editors  
(note, <font> doesn't have to be just a font setting, it is for any  
purely presentational application of additional style) is probably  
sufficient for most needs, but I could be missing something.


Received on Friday, 27 April 2007 08:59:07 UTC