- From: Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>
- Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 01:07:28 +0100
- To: Philip TAYLOR <Philip-and-LeKhanh@Royal-Tunbridge-Wells.Org>
- CC: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Leif Halvard Silli 08-02-10 00.56: > > Philip TAYLOR 08-02-09 09.43: >> Ian Hickson wrote: >>> In the spec as it stands today, <b> and <i> are not presentational >>> and semantic-free. They are in fact defined in a semantic manner, >>> just like <strong>, <em>, etc. >> Yes, in the /draft/ specification as it stands today [1], your >> assertion is correct. However <b>, <i> and <u> /are/ purely >> presentational, and the fact that the draft specification >> misrepresents this is a matter of considerable concern and regret. >> I for one will be seeking to ensure that this is corrected in >> a future draft, and that the <b> and <i> elements do not >> appear in the specification when it is finally released. > > SPAN, in the spec, also has semantics: [ etcetera ] Hi all, and especially Philp. I'm sorry for having sent a draft of my reply to the list. Please ignore. I litteraly used a short-cut that I did not know about. -- leif halvard silli
Received on Sunday, 10 February 2008 00:08:26 UTC