Re: [whatwg] <font>

On 3/5/07 2:23 AM, "Sander Tekelenburg" <> wrote:
> OK. Real world issues. But that doesn't mean that the HTML spec is the place
> to fix those. Looks more like an opportunity for beter PDF generators to grab
> market share and for IE to fix security bugs.

Well sure you can ignore the real world if you like, I'm just letting you
know what's currently happening. If the spec chooses to ignore that then
it's gambling on the fact that implementors care more about being spec
compliant than making things work for their clients. That's not to
discourage the spec from going after the most ideal solution, but if we want
the spec to be useful we do need to consider the impact these decisions have
in the real world.

> Right. Given that that is what they're used to that's understandable. However
> "used to" implies that the same people could work with a more semantic
> editor, if they'd be used to that. People get born every day without yet
> being used to Word.

I wish you the best of luck with that project (no sarcasm intended). To date
I have seen numerous people try and fail. In our editors we're trying to
find ways to make it easier for people to generate semantic content and
leave the presentation to the stylesheet, but we still haven't managed to
get rid of the allure of the font menu. We'll keep trying though.

It really is worth noting in this that the font tag currently allowed by the
spec is comletely and utterly useless and should be removed. It's only
useful if it allows the size and face attributes and even then I'm not sure
there's a reason to bring it back after it's already been removed from other
HTML standards.


Adrian Sutton.
Adrian Sutton, Integrations Product Manager
Global Direct: +1 (650) 292 9659 x717  Australia: +61 (7) 3858 0118
UK +44 (20) 8123 0617 x717    Mobile +61 (4) 222-36329
Ephox <>,   Ephox Blogs <>

Received on Wednesday, 2 May 2007 20:48:39 UTC