- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 10:44:08 +0200
- To: Ben 'Cerbera' Millard <cerbera@projectcerbera.com>
- Cc: "Sam Ruby" <rubys@us.ibm.com>, "HTMLWG" <public-html@w3.org>
On Dec 13, 2007, at 05:54, Ben 'Cerbera' Millard wrote: > <acronym title> seems fine to me. > > * UAs already support <acronym title>. > * Replacing every <acronym title> on the web with <abbr title> would > probably cost a lot of money. Fortunately, HTML5 does not require changes to legacy content that is left as-is. Unfortunately, this is indeed an issue for aggregating markup from different sources some of which live in the legacy. However, to the extent such aggregator has to remove <font>, it could replace acronym with abbr. Is that sillier than removing <font>? The main benefit of making <acronym> non-conforming is saving people a lot of time in the future by eliminating the permathread about what should be marked up as <abbr> and what as <acronym>. > * Allow <u> anywhere similar elements are allowed (such as <i> and > <b>). Underlined text may be useful in other situations. Agreed. (Moreover, the use cases for <m> could probably be achieved satisfactorily with <u class='m'> provided that the spec standardizes the UA style for <u> so that it is unambiguous how one might undo the default styling.) -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Thursday, 13 December 2007 08:44:38 UTC