- From: Anne van Kesteren <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
- Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 10:20:51 +0200
Ian Hickson wrote: >> You missed <p><blockquote/></p>. > > Oops, yep. Added. I could see the point with CODE versus PRE versus CODE as only child of PRE as they have different kind of semantics. But what is the reason for BLOCKQUOTE? Clearly, Q is for inline and you don't really need BLOCKQUOTE for that. (If you want to quote a table from some other source, perhaps, but then again, you could just alter the Q element its content model.) >> The problem is that you mix inline with block-level. Unless UL is >> redefined to be inline level within P I don't think this is a good >> idea. I like the idea of having either inline or block-level >> content. > > The spec now has block-level, structured inline-level, and strictly > inline-level concepts. I'm not overly fond of the names (better > suggestions welcome), but I hope it addresses your concerns. Mostly, except that they are underdefined at the moment. I assume that section is still being worked on? -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/>
Received on Tuesday, 12 April 2005 01:20:51 UTC