- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 09:47:32 -0800
- To: Doug Schepers <doug@schepers.cc>
- CC: www-archive@w3.org
Doug Schepers wrote: > >> 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 have no idea what issues you were having with <code> not being styleable. I've never run into such problems myself. Maybe you're complaining about things like <code><pre>...</pre></code> not working? That would be because the markup is invalid. > 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. Code in an example block should be inside a <pre>, certainly. What I'm objecting to is the things like <span class="..."><code>...</code></span> that you had. The span is excessive. ~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 25 November 2009 17:48:07 UTC