W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > September 2009

Re: what is dt?

From: Jeremy Keith <jeremy@adactio.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 23:04:59 +0100
Cc: Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>, Smylers@stripey.com, public-html@w3.org
Message-Id: <205765F7-354F-4E6C-90CD-7A7295C20CAB@adactio.com>
To: Stephen Stewart <carisenda@gmail.com>
Stephen Stewart wrote:
>> I concur completely with both your exclamation point and your  
>> question mark. It's nutty advice that will be ignored by authors.
> How is it "nutty" and why will it be ignored by authors?

It is nutty because it suggests that a semantically empty element  
(which is how the <b> element is now defined) is somehow suitable for  
marking up the semantics of a person being cited in a  
dialogue ...while obstinately refusing the accept that the existing  
practice of marking up cited people with the <cite> element is a  
viable option.

I know it will be ignored by authors because authors are smart.

A smattering from Twitter today:

"Jaw, floor, WHAT?! http://bit.ly/48Bhta Why in the world would #html5  
suggest using <b> tags to markup names?"

"There are more appropriate tags than <b> for marking up names in  
conversations. “The b element should be used as a last resort…” #html5"

"Well, if the <p><b> recommendations for dialog in #html5 persist for  
a week, I know what I’m drawing."

But if more evidence is required, I'll see about putting together a  
representative sampling of authors, sitting them in front of a  
computer with a copy of Silverback fired up, and point them to the  
relevant part of the spec so that we can see their reactions.

Keeping the <b> and <i> elements in HTML5 is already a lot for authors  
to have to swallow. To suggest that these elements should be used  
instead of more semantically appropriate elements isn't going to fly.

Jeremy Keith

a d a c t i o

Received on Tuesday, 15 September 2009 22:05:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:44:57 UTC