Re: Emphasizing STRIKE

Striked text is actually a document revision even on paper, the most
we could do to cover such cases when you want to keep record on
deleted sections prior to document transcription is add an appropiate
datetime attribute, or if that doesn't suffice then propose an
alternate attribute for the <del> element.
To any extent, <strike> doesn't work any better than <del> for such
cases. (why is it striked, when it was striked... all these are
attributes of the <del> element).

--
Gonzalo Rubio


On Feb 6, 2008 12:45 AM, Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no> wrote:
>
> I don't how many occurences of the STRIKE elements - <STRIKE> and <S> -
> Google can reveal, if such a thing has any relationsship to this. But
> semantically, if the case can be made for the underline element - as has
> recently been done -  then it can also be made for the STRIKE element.
>
> The strike element cannot be replaced by the DEL element. The DEL
> element is for marking up document revisions. According to the draft:
> «The del element represents a removal from the document.» Wheras the
> STRIKE element in fact represent an addition: the very strike itself.
>
> Usecases: In a time when more and more is moving to «web format», we for
> instance need to be able to translate documents (from one human language
> to another) e.g. using some kind of «Web word processor»to do so. And
> what  do translators find in paper documents? Text that has been striked
> over, is not uncommon. Another usecase is «webification» of paper files
> and documents.  Eg, think intelligence services files ;-).
>
> I don't understand what the motivation for removing the strike element
> could possibly be? For instance, a mark-up like <del><strike>I
> liked</strike></del> is entirely possible.
>
> I don't know how an AT reader treats the STRIKE element. But it should
> of course be able to inform the user that the text has ben striked over
> - just as someone reading a text in front of an audience would inform
> the listeners during the reading, if some part of the text has become
> striked over. STRIKE is not just about achieving a stylistic effect - or
> without relevance to AT users. On the contrary, the STRIKE element
> instead of a SPAN with a a strike-through decoration, could be
> especially helpful for AT users.
>
> Some referenes to arguments in favour of STRIKE from  2007:
>      Rob Burns:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Aug/1206.html
>      Murray Maloney:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007May/0849.html
> --
> leif halvard silli
>
>
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 6 February 2008 11:42:29 UTC