- From: dorian taylor <dorian.taylor.lists@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 14:23:01 -0700
- To: "Shane P. McCarron" <shane@aptest.com>
- Cc: "public-xhtml2@w3.org" <public-xhtml2@w3.org>
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Shane P. McCarron <shane@aptest.com> wrote: > I guess. Not sure why you would want to embed markup in it but yes. It would > work. Well, I don't, but let me back up to the beginning, I think there are a few discrete issues that are conflated here. :) I understand that there is a form of meta that overlaps semantically with title. When meta had a content model of Text*, one could effectively generate a title that had markup in it. What I was addressing in my initial message, before I was aware that you had changed the content model back to EMPTY, was that if a meta element could mean the same thing as the title and contain markup, why not the title element itself? More specifically, is there a reason that the title element's content should be relegated to #PCDATA*? (I can live with a #PCDATA-only title element, it just made sense to me to match the form of meta such that they were truly equivalent - such that the meta element wasn't "richer" than the title.) Upon notification that the content model in link and meta were removed, I began to think instead of cases in which it would be useful to have a canonically non-displaying element with marked-up content, such as what a meta element with a Text* content model would provide. One case I came up with in particular was the depiction of an rdf:XMLLiteral out of band from the document's body. Sorry for the confusion! -- Dorian Taylor http://doriantaylor.com/
Received on Saturday, 11 April 2009 21:23:41 UTC