- From: Christopher R. Maden <crm@ebt.com>
- Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 21:44:52 GMT
- To: www-html@w3.org
Keith Ivey: > I don't understand why marking a foreign word with <EM> when you're > not emphasizing it is any better than marking it with <I>. Marking a word as foreign is one form of emphasis. I've seen a number of SGML DTDs that use <emph type="foreign">. <em>E.g.</em>, pretentious people may use the term <em>objets</em> all willy-nilly. > I'm not even sure about <CITE>; it seems a strange name to use for > something indicating a title (but then <TITLE> was already taken). > Wilbur says it's for "citations or references to other sources", > which doesn't mean titles to mean. I'm basically working around a limitation of the DTD. The title of the work should be noted as such, and <cite> is the closest element. This is overloading the element, but until real SGML comes to the Web and I can define my own elements, I have to make do. That's why HTML as such is doomed; we can't possibly design a single document type that's usable for everybody without serious overloading. > As soon as there's a widely supported way in HTML to indicate all > the things that italics indicate in print (words used as words, > foreign words, mathematical (but not programming) variables that > aren't vectors or Greek letters, emphasized words, species names, > titles, etc.), I'll stop using <I>. Not before. That's reasonable. Now if only you had the tools to *define* all the elements you needed... -Chris -- <!NOTATION SGML.Geek PUBLIC "-//GCA//NOTATION SGML Geek//EN"> <!ENTITY crism PUBLIC "-//EBT//NONSGML Christopher R. Maden//EN" SYSTEM "<URL>http://www.ebt.com <TEL>+1.401.421.9550 <FAX>+1.401.521.2030 <USMAIL>One Richmond Square, Providence, RI 02906 USA" NDATA SGML.Geek>
Received on Monday, 5 August 1996 17:52:44 UTC