Re: Scholarly paper in HTML+RDF through RASH

Silvio Peroni <silvio.peroni@unibo.it> writes:

> Hi Marynas,
>
> first of all, thanks for your comments!
>
> A couple of answers, motivating why we didn’t originally choose to use the HTML elements you suggested:
>
>> A couple remarks regarding HTML:
>> <p class="code"> could be <pre><code>
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/text.html#edef-CODE <http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/text.html#edef-CODE>
>
> Basically, it was made on purpose as a design choice. In RASH we wanted to
> keep everything much easier, in particular when defining similar behaviour in
> different contexts (e.g., in inline elements and in block elements). If we use
> the full HTML approach as you suggested, I should use different tags for
> defining codes. In particular:
>
> Inline code definition: 
> <p>This text contains a <i><code>call to a function in italics</code></i> as an inline element.</p>
>
> Block code definition:
> <pre><code>This is a full block of code</code></pre>
>
> As you can see, to have both situations I should use at least two additional
> elements of HTML (and thus I should have to extend RASH). In addition, to
> define block code, I should use *two* elements together.


Still, the <pre><code> combination is recommended in the HTML5
documentation. And tools like prism.js, for instance, support it
out-of-the-box. Simple is important, but not if it introduces complexity
elsewhere.


Phil

Received on Wednesday, 27 May 2015 11:39:57 UTC