- From: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 15:41:20 -0400
- To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 2:13 PM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote: > Firefox (cited above) is a concrete example of a tool that would rather > change the markup used to signal underlining to be one that does not > trigger validation errors rather than remove the option to underline > entirely. WikiMedia was listed as a single example of a tool that does > not provide an option for underlining. It's not important, but just for the record: 1) The software is called MediaWiki. Wikimedia is the name of the organization that runs Wikipedia and oversees MediaWiki development, among other things. 2) MediaWiki's wikisyntax does support bold and italics and not underlines. However, MediaWiki also supports direct use of many HTML tags, including <u>, so users can produce underlines in MediaWiki. Also, the formatting toolbar currently used on Wikipedia appears to have buttons for bold and italic and not underline, but you can still type <u> tags directly.
Received on Friday, 8 April 2011 19:42:08 UTC