- From: fantasai <fantasai@escape.com>
- Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 21:43:08 -0400
- To: www-html@w3.org
Etan Wexler wrote: > > I agree that there is some utility there. A URI-designating element type > would be better than a restricted e-mail-designating element type. Still > better would be an element type that allowed any syntax in the content. > Equivalence to URIs could be handled through an optional attribute. We could > call the element type 'mri' for "machine-readable identifier". Consider the > following examples. ... An element that could mark up filenames would be helpful. They're usually marked up in one way or another for styling (in italics, monospace, etc.). Also, if an 'mri' element were added, it should have an attribute mentioning the type--whether it is an 'email' address, a formal 'uri', an 'fpi', the full 'path' to a file, or simply a 'filename'. ~fantasai
Received on Tuesday, 8 April 2003 21:42:32 UTC