- From: Andy <aholmes84@shaw.ca>
- Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 22:25:56 -0700
- To: Simon Jessey <simon@jessey.net>, www-html@w3.org
Simon Jessey wrote: >>This element meant to serve as a replacement for <br/>, I still think it >>will too drastically complexify wysiwyg editors. I still totally >>disagree with the removal of <br/>. >> I also disagree with the total removal of <br/>. Although often misused it does have it's place and the way I see it no non-empty element could be a replacement for it. >> >> > >As far as I am concerned, the only difference between <l>foo</l><l>bar</l> >and foo<br />bar is that the <l>...</l> container provides an easy >presentational hook, much like <sentence>...</sentence> or <word>...</word> >might do. > >If I am correct in thinking that the <l>...</l> element has the same >behavior as <div>...</div>, why not remove BOTH from the specification and >use <container>...</container> (or some other appropriate word/abbreviation) >that accomplishes both tasks instead? > No I must disagree. I'm not so experienced in these matters, but we must keep in mind that the markup is not necessarily going to be parsed by a visual browser. <div/> might be able to have the same effect as <l/> visually (with a bit of CSS) but might have a totally different effect to an aural browser.
Received on Wednesday, 16 April 2003 19:27:25 UTC