- From: Jukka K. Korpela <jukka.k.korpela@kolumbus.fi>
- Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 21:22:04 +0300
- To: public-html@w3.org
2014-03-30 19:22, Jens O. Meiert wrote: > FYI/FWIW, the HTML index at > http://meiert.com/en/indices/html-elements/ now includes spec links > for all elements, as well as HTML 2.0 (it used to start at HTML 3.2) > which makes it span all major versions of HTML. > This is an admirable effort, but there are some errors. Regarding <b>, it’s definitely not “Bold text style” as per HTML5 CR (even though its definition for <b> is messy to put it mildly, and <b> *should* be defined as “bold text style” or, better, “bold font face”, but it isn’t, in HTML5). Similar considerations apply to <i>. I don’t quite see the idea of including XHTML 2.0, a draft that was never completed. If you include it, why not HTML 3.0? It might have had more influence: it was never implemented, but it was cited for many years after its expiration. XHTML 2.0 has just been forgotten. -- Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Received on Monday, 31 March 2014 18:22:33 UTC