- From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2013 13:49:57 +0100
- To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Hi Leif On 7 Jun 2013, at 13:23, Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> wrote: > Steve Faulkner, Fri, 7 Jun 2013 10:05:52 +0100: > >> but we need to decide if the "must not" requirement on use of <small> is an >> appropriate conformance requirement for HTML? > > What we discussed with regard to <small>, can be described as an > attempt to *add* - eventually “find” - subheading semantics to <small>. > > However, there were no recorded result from the discussion. As such, > Ian’s proposal to explicitly declare <small> as unpermitted for the > purpose of subheadings, should be uncontroversial. I don't believe the discussion has concluded. I also believe that we don't have consensus on how small should be used. > It is worth pointing > out that he does not say that small is forbidden as child of h1-h6 - he > only says that it is forbidden for the purpose of subheadings. > -- > leif halvard silli
Received on Friday, 7 June 2013 12:50:19 UTC