W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > July 2008

[whatwg] <font>

From: Kristof Zelechovski <giecrilj@stegny.2a.pl>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 14:48:56 +0200
Message-ID: <A9C597141445437398590D5293DF3D98@POCZTOWIEC>
I think corporate and community flavors are out of scope; they can do
whatever they like, including having a custom validator and browser.  On the
other hand, if there is a way to such content to get published to the WWW,
the publisher should transform the content and/or discipline the authors.
The transformation will, of course, depend on the particular content, and
should probably involve considerations the authors have no chance of taking.
Chris


-----Original Message-----
From: whatwg-bounces@lists.whatwg.org
[mailto:whatwg-bounces at lists.whatwg.org] On Behalf Of Ian Hickson
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 12:49 PM
To: Sander Tekelenburg; Adrian Sutton; Adrian Lynch; Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Cc: whatwg at lists.whatwg.org
Subject: Re: [whatwg] <font>


On Wed, 9 May 2007, Adrian Sutton wrote:
> 
> 2. I strongly recommend that people don't include a font menu and 
> instead use CSS to apply styling to ensure a consistent look for their 
> site.
> 
> The only reason I said anything in this thread is so that the list was 
> aware of the realities of what a WYSIWYG HTML editor has to deal with.
> 
> Now as for particular use cases - there are many people who are using 
> HTML editors as a replacement for a word processor. They may be using an 
> internal wiki where anything goes, a content management system or a 
> range of other systems. These people basically don't care about content 
> vs presentation, they want it to work like Word does and as such they 
> want a font menu, color menus, the whole lot. For them it works and 
> since I'm not an on-site consultant, I don't necessarily have all the 
> details of why they want it to work this way. What I do know is that 
> there are people who want to use presentational markup in HTML. This use 
> case is completely supported by inline styles and span tags, there's no 
> need for an exception in the spec.
> 
> Hopefully that clears up the confusion over what I'm seeing our clients 
> do vs what I think the spec should include.

Sadly those systems end up tied to a particular medium, and fail to render 
in a good way for, say, users of text browsers or speech renderers. Not 
sure what to do about that though.
Received on Tuesday, 29 July 2008 05:48:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:03 UTC