- 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