- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 16:46:05 -0400
Ian Hickson wrote: > I agree that it doesn't seem to make much sense to nest paragraphs inside > those tables though. Agreed. > <pre><code> ... </code></pre> > <blockcode> ... </blockcode> > > ...and given that the former would work in all existing UAs and the second > wouldn't, and the former has the same semantics as the second, I don't see > much of an advantage to the second. It's similar to the distinction between <div><q> ... </q></div> and <blockquote> ... </blockquote> >>That is indirectly nesting P elements, a bit ugly IMHO. It also doesn't >>make sense. > > Agreed. > >>> <ol> >>> <li> >>> <p> >> >>Why would you want a P element there? > > It would probably be part of something bigger, as in: > > <ol> > <li> > <p>...</p> > <p>...</p> > <p>...</p> > <p> > ... > <ol> > <li>... You're still indirectly nesting paragraphs here. Although I agree that you get nested paragraphs with blockquote, I don't think that the author's own text would have a paragraph within a paragraph, list markers notwithstanding. >>> <pre> >>> <p>...</p> >>> <p>...</p> >>> </pre> >> >>Ouch! Forbid this. > > I probably agree with this, but I'm not 100% sure. What about <pre> > blocks around e-mails: <pre> means <preformatted> not <preserve whitespace>. You should not have block-level markup within <pre>; block-level distinctions within <preformatted> text (such as plaintext emails) are given by the previous formatting (e.g. whitespace). (Yes, I meant 'e.g.'; C code is preformatted, too, but its block level distinctions are given by braces and the like.) ~fantasai
Received on Monday, 11 April 2005 13:46:05 UTC