- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 09:06:32 -0500
- To: Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>
- Cc: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Smylers@stripey.com, public-html@w3.org
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 9:56 PM, Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net> wrote: > Leif Halvard Silli wrote: >> I have no idea at all why the draft suddenly says that we can use <p> for >> dialog. I took part in the the debate and saw no compelling arguments. >> Perhaps it was Microsoft's un-support that made the deal? >> [snip] > > Yet a decision is made that has generated out and out rejection from every > web page author who has happened to see it. Vehemently rejected. No it has not. Not even close. A handful of people got themselves in a twist because they saw <b> being recommended for something. Overall, though, the current recommendation is nothing more than an outlining of *current practice*. We argued, *on this list*, that <dialog> wasn't sufficient for marking up dialog, and that people were already marking up dialog happily in various other manners (lists, paragraphs, and sometimes tables), and that these alternate methods *did* work because we had full flexibility. Ian just chose a path that seemed the most reasonable out of all of those (and I agree that it's pretty reasonable and will probably change my chat room to generate markup along those lines). Please don't mistake mailing list heat for internet-wide rejection. A lot of us around here *like* arguing, and we did so well enough to convince the editor that his idea wasn't worth the effort. ~TJ
Received on Friday, 18 September 2009 14:07:33 UTC