W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2008

Re: Emphasizing STRIKE

From: gonchuki <gonchuki@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 16:23:07 -0200
Message-ID: <8320a9390802071023v1957eca2t2d6a50eb07e56aaa@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Chasen Le Hara" <rendezvouscp@gmail.com>
Cc: public-html@w3.org

On Feb 7, 2008 4:05 PM, Chasen Le Hara <rendezvouscp@gmail.com> wrote:
> believe that the overall benefit of marking up the
> referenced bug with the strike element *might* be worth the cost of keeping
> it in the spec *if* we can find other use cases for the strike element. It
> would be great if we could find semantics for the strike element, but I
> don't see that happening.

You won't find it as <strike> is a presentational element. Stroked
doesn't mean resolved, or invalid, or whatever. It just means stroked
and that's just visual perception. Remember that semantics go beyond
what the user perceives visually, it's about giving concrete and
concise meaning to the marked up text.
Received on Thursday, 7 February 2008 18:23:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:30 UTC