Re: Underline element.

On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 15:30:12 +0100, DESCHAMPS Stephane ROSI/SI CLIENT  
<> wrote:

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Ca Phun Ung
> Envoyé : lundi 7 janvier 2008 10:54
>> I'm not suggesting we replace <i> for <name> either but maybe we should
>> think of ways to break apart <i> so that it's no longer necessary to a  
>> point of deprecation.
> We may still need a generic italicizing method though.

Actually, we have CSS for generic italics... but...

> For example I'm often using foreign-language locutions, and since I'm  
> trying to avoid <i>, I've come used to using <span class="locution"...


> So, either we have tags for every kind of semantic-oriented use of <i>,
> which I seriously doubt, or we have to keep it for a long, very long  
> time.

Indeed. we actually have several elements that default to italics. <i> has  
almost the same lack of semantics as span and should be recognised as a  
similar general-purpose container with no real semantics associated. But  
it is useful in the case of some semantic where italics is a common  
representation, since it does actually allow semantics to be added by  
RDFa, µformats, GRDDL, or similar methods - and for authors who aren't  
very interested in providing clear semantics for their documents beyond a  
bit of presentational highlighting it does the job at no loss to the user  
(if the author wasn't going to provide anything and take the shortest path  
to making it "look right", you didn't lose anything by ending up with a  
semantically poor document).

I am not a fan of the i, u and b elements, but they have use cases and  
they are in use on the web already, both publicly and in extensive and  
well-structured intranets. I think they should be kept, as semantic-free  
containers, with appropriate recomendations about how to use them  
(sparingly, where there is no more appropriate element, with semantics  



Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
     je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk   Try Opera 9.5:

Received on Monday, 7 January 2008 14:54:45 UTC