- From: James Graham <jg307@cam.ac.uk>
- Date: Sun, 04 Sep 2005 20:02:57 +0100
Lachlan Hunt wrote: > Henri Sivonen wrote: > >> >> Could the user interface difficulties with this semantic inline >> elements stem at least partly from problems with the semantic inline >> elements themselves? > > > I don't think so. I think it stems from the average person who thinks > about things presentationally and jumps straight from "what is the > content" to "how do I want it to look" and then marks that up. The > problem is then compounded by poorly designed authoring tools that > encourage such practices. What's the difference between a poorly designed element and one that doesn't fit the mental model of authors? If the second doesn't imply the first then can we reasonably expect authors to use the elements in the intended way? When designing the spec should we not consider the usability of the language to be a high priority? If people get things wrong all the time that, almost by definition, seems to imply poor usability, and hence poor design, no? -- "As soon as people come up with a measurable substitute for whatever it is they care about they start treating it as more important than the real thing" -Boris Zbarsky
Received on Sunday, 4 September 2005 12:02:57 UTC