- From: Brian Behlendorf <brian@organic.com>
- Date: Wed, 19 Apr 1995 17:03:21 -0700 (PDT)
- To: Philippe-Andre Prindeville <philipp@res.enst.fr>
- Cc: Multiple recipients of list <www-html@www10.w3.org>
On Wed, 19 Apr 1995, Philippe-Andre Prindeville wrote: > I've been thinking about another HTML related issue in a project > we are working on here... We need to control whether some text > (which is heavily annotated) is rendered in seriffed or sans-serif > fonts. Why? Simple. > > Examples of usage of text and idioms are given in seriffed fonts. > > Comments on the utilisation and the parts of speech, ie. the > annotation itself, needs to be rendered in a sans-serif font. > It doesn't really matter which: universe, avant-garde, helvetica, > geneva, etc. > > So, we have the notions of "text" and "meta-text", ie. text on > the text itself. Bold and italic aren't sufficient for denoting > the difference. The meta-text itself can in turn be <strong> or > <em>... > > Can we introduce a new mechanism? <ss> (for sans-serif)? Instead, let's do this: ----- <HEAD> <TITLE>My Document</TITLE> <STYLE notation=experimental> ... samp.font = sans-serif ... </STYLE> </HEAD> And now we have some <SAMP>idioms</SAMP>. ----- Look at http://www.hpl.hp.co.uk/people/dsr/html/logical.html and decide, if <SAMP> isn't quite the one you want which one is. If you can't decide and want a few more choices, take the HTML 3.0 DTD and modify it to allow your own semantic tags (as long as you make sure the only thing you label as text/html when you dish these files out is really HTML). Own your data! Brian --=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-- brian@organic.com brian@hyperreal.com http://www.[hyperreal,organic].com/
Received on Wednesday, 19 April 1995 20:03:22 UTC