- From: David Latapie <david@empyree.org>
- Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 22:51:03 +0100
On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 21:05:38 +0100, Anne van Kesteren wrote: >> Please elaborate on this. On www-html, you asked me to cover nesting, >> which I did (or thought I did) by introducing additions. I guess I >> misunderstood what you meant by nesting. So, what it is? > > I don't believe in changing the way things have worked for a long > time in a drastic way for almost no benefit. It seems silly. It's not > backwards compatible, it's not intiutive, it requires way more typing > and addresses only a few theoretical use cases. I addressed the backward-compatibity with <em> and <strong> as shorcut for +1 and +2 I agree that the + and minus may be a bad idea; remember I was proposing an idea and am completely open to another way to handle this. The +/- point at a problem with incremental values: bolder, smaller, larger and so on. So this is not a new concern, this is a pretty old one. It just happens that is usually is about presentation, but here we have a case where it is about structure too. As for not being intuitive... Well addition seems pretty intuitive to me, and "plus" (+)/"minus" (-) for "more"/"less" (important/not important) too Finally, this is not theoretical, except if we consider thousands of sidenotes as marginal You are right about typing, this is long. but anything with a property will be (<table summary=""> is, <blockquote cite=""> is too, let alone <span xml:lang="">) Oops did I look aggressive, there? You tell me <== this could be a small-size remark at the end of a blog post (<emph value="-1">) -- </david_latapie> U+0F00 http://blog.empyree.org/en (English) http://blog.empyree.org/fr (Fran?ais) http://blog.empyree.org/sl (Slovensko)
Received on Thursday, 8 February 2007 13:51:03 UTC