deprecated tags in Wilbur & Cougar (fwd)

Once upon a time Arne Knudson shaped the electrons to say...
>     I fail to see that reasoning behind re-incorporating the deprecated
>font tags, like <U>, back into the DTDs. I thought that way back during the
>HTML 2.0 draft discussions, it was decided that <U> was rather evil, because
>so many browsers used underline to represent links.
>     I think that <U> should be removed from the DTD. Perhaps, with the
>changes to browsers, that re-visiting the debate over <U> may be worthwhile,
>but I think we should strongly discourage people from using it.

been there, done that, look in the archives.

There are many fields that *require* underlining to be valid in 
documentation and expecting fields that have been around for decades (or
longer) to develop new standards would be ridiculous.  Same with legal
documentation.  In order to allow it to be accurately reproduced in HTML
you must have underlining.

Livingston Enterprises - Chair, Department of Interstitial Affairs
Phone: 800-458-9966 510-426-0770 FAX: 510-426-8951
For support requests:  <> 
Snail mail: 6920 Koll Center Parkway  #220, Pleasanton, CA 94566

Received on Wednesday, 31 July 1996 21:21:37 UTC