- From: Jeff Schiller <codedread@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 06:17:26 -0600
- To: HTMLWG <public-html@w3.org>
- Cc: gonchuki <gonchuki@gmail.com>, "Leif Halvard Silli" <lhs@malform.no>
He is so <del cite="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humour">stupid</del> smart... Regards, Jeff On Feb 6, 2008 10:01 AM, Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no> wrote: > > gonchuki 08-02-06 16.28: > > Nothing ensures that striking text on paper will let it remain > > readable. This is more of a visual representation and perception issue > > than a semantic one. > > > > Writing anyting on paper, for instance by hand, doesn't guarantee it > becomes readable. What is your point? We are not talking about > accidently hitting the paper with a stroke. > > The strike element _informs_ that the selected text has a strike through > itself. That is an information that has semantic implications. But what > that strike represents - why it was striked out - that is for the reader > to judge. To say that it does represent an edition, if you have no > information about such a thing, is to give unfounded information. The > reader has to judge that for him-/herself, based on context and other > information available. > > If this strike also does represent a certain edition, then you can add a > INS - or a DEL - around it, dependeing on whether it is - or should be - > inserted or deleted. > > > > Even if you know the date, the point is not to emphasize that this > > > represents a certain edition. For instance if you want, in your blog, to > > > humorously mark up- "he is stupid" as deleted, and "he is nice" as > > > inserted, then you should use <strike>stupid</strike> and not > > > <del>stupid</del> (and the underline element - not INS). > > > > this is actually a <del> tag, even if inserted on purpose the semantic > > meaning is that of a revision on the text to delete your supposed > > previous statement. To clarify, on this particular use case your > > intention is to represent deleted text, even if you are joking around. > > > > Absolutely not. You are wrong. The DEL and INS are supposed to show > actual edition. In this example, <strike>stupid</strike> does not > represent any edition. It represent the one and only edition. The > reader will have to judge for him- or herself whether to take it > humorously or not. After all, it is a joke. > > > > For instance, to insert a striked out text - that you forgot to notice > > > the first time. Without the STRIKE element, we would have to use a > > > meaningless DEL inside INS. This perhaps gives the same visual effect. > > > But it doesn't have the same semantics. Thus it is, in fact, visual > > > non-semantic mark-up. It can be compared to using INS instead of the > > > UNDERLINE element. > > > > if your HTML is correctly marked up with the relevant datetime > > attribute on the <ins> tag, then inserting a <del> tag with its proper > > datetime will clarify the edition process you made. > > > > Of course it will. But as explained, the point with STRIKE is not to > «clarify the edition process», but to accuratly mark up the phrase > structure of a certain text. Without regard to the historical process > that text might have gone through. > -- > leif halvard silli > > > > >
Received on Thursday, 7 February 2008 12:17:37 UTC