- From: Philip TAYLOR [PC87S/O-XP] <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
- Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 18:10:12 +0100
- To: Ernest Cline <ernestcline@mindspring.com>
- CC: www-html@w3.org
Although in general I disagree with Earnest Cline's position /in re/ <p> .. </p> v. &ps;, I do feel he has a valid point when he writes L > Actually, the sentence is the most basic structural unit of prose > composition, and it has no markup associated with it. What is there > about paragraphs in general that makes it important to be marked up, > while the sentence is not? There is little doubt in my mind that even the most pure of purist logical markup advocates have, somewhere in the deepest recesses of their minds, some anticipation of how their carefully-marked-up text will appear after styling by some rendering agent. They probably care not one jot whether new paras are indented or set off by vertical white space, but they do want them to appear as clearly discernible paras rather than as /ad hoc/ text. But surely those same purists also want their sentences to appear as sentences, and -- in those environments or locales where extra space is traditionally added after the final period of a sentence -- I would imagine that they would rather like different typographic treatment of the periods in "J. R. R. Tolkien" to the treatment of the period at the end of this sentence. Thus I would support M. Cline's argument that <sentence> ... </sentence> is arguably as important as <p> ... </p>, even though HTML has ignored the concept ever since its inception. Philip Taylor, RHBNC
Received on Monday, 7 April 2003 13:10:43 UTC