- From: Simon Pieters <zcorpan@hotmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 05:51:08 +0000
Hi, From: "Simon Pieters" <zcorpan@hotmail.com> >Well... in that case <strong> needs to be defined as being equivalent to ><b> and <em> equivalent to <i>, and the ability to mark things as being >important or as stress emphasis is lost. Actually, when I think about it, the ability to express such semantics *could* be moved to the class="" attribute, e.g. class=important and class=emphasis, with perhaps both being appliciable to all of <strong>, <b>, <em> and <i>, and perhaps some others too. Perhaps that will be better understood by authors. Or perhaps we don't need a way to express these semantics. I don't know. I don't like giving up on things, though. :-( If it leads to this then adding <em> and <strong> to HTML was a mistake in the first place. Regards, Simon Pieters _________________________________________________________________ Titta p? livekonserter - exklusivt p? MSN http://msnpresents.msn.com/hub/?mkt=sv-se
Received on Wednesday, 10 January 2007 21:51:08 UTC