- From: Doug Schepers <doug@schepers.cc>
- Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 02:41:53 -0500
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Cc: www-archive@w3.org
Hi, fantasai- Thanks for your feedback! I've incorporated it, and created a new draft: http://www.w3.org/People/Schepers/spec-conventions.html It probably still needs work (maybe a lot of work), but I'm interested to hear more feedback. At this point, I'm wondering where the best list to process feedback is... is there a WG this should be handled by? Replies inline... fantasai wrote (on 11/24/09 6:35 PM): > > 1. Implementing this should not break styling on existing specs. Right, I've now explained in more detail that this styling is in a separate supplementary stylesheet. > 2. Defining Instance of Term has its own element, it's called <dfn>. > Please use that and not <span><code>. If you're defining a bit > of code, then <dfn><code> would be appropriate, otherwise not. Well spotted. I've corrected the examples. > 3. For cross-referenced terms, if you think <a> is insufficient on > its own, then per HTML5, I believe <i> would be the appropriate > element to use there. I'm not sure I follow you. Why would <i> be appropriate for a reference? I realize that HTML5 dresses it up to be more semantic, but that seems a bit contrived to me... <i> just means "italic", and while it sometimes was used in the way described in HTML (pre-5), it was often not. I'd prefer to steer clear of that one unless it's made a bit clearer. >Also, IMHO <code> should also be acceptable > in place of <i> when marking up bits of code rather than bits of > English. > > 4. Use <code> for your code markup, not <span>. That means attributes, > elements, values, etc. IIRC, <code> wasn't consistently stylable, which is why the SVG WG used the more complicated nesting of <span class="attr"><code>foo</code></span>... if there aren't issues anymore, I'd be very happy to simplify the markup (which I have done in the new draft). I actually made a typo by leaving them out in the example, which I've now corrected. > Did you know!? <code> can accept the 'class' and 'id' attributes. Yes, I sometimes do that, but didn't in the rough draft document since I was trying to show code in an example block. I could make an example that uses just <code class="foo">, if you think it would help clarify. Regards- -Doug
Received on Wednesday, 25 November 2009 07:42:31 UTC