- From: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 13:49:54 -0500
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- CC: www-archive@w3.org
Hi, fantasai- fantasai wrote (on 11/25/09 12:47 PM): > 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. Yup, I totally agree, but there was some reason the SVG WG was doing that... Cameron reflected it in his build script, so I think it was still the case just recently, but with him on hiatus, I don't know the rationale. In any case, I was happy to simplify it... let me know if the new markup is to your satisfaction. Regards- -Doug Schepers W3C Team Contact, SVG and WebApps WGs
Received on Wednesday, 25 November 2009 18:50:04 UTC