- From: Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
- Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 17:45:16 -0700
- To: <www-html@w3.org>
On 5/10/03 4:59 PM, "Simon Jessey" <simon@jessey.net> wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jelks Cabaniss" <jelks@jelks.nu> > Subject: Magic Elements (was: kelvSYC's Thoughts on the new XHTML Draft) > > >> There's a new removal error about to happen: <q>. Just as there may be >> difficulties in edge cases of <ol start="0">, there may be some with <q> > in >> some i18n contexts, but is throwing the baby out with the bathwater >> warranted here? >> >> If the WG follows the same path for <ol> as it took recently with <q>, > we'll >> no doubt end up with something like ... >> >> >> <orderedlist> >> <li>1. Cats</li> >> <li>2. Dogs</li> >> <li>3. Rats</li> >> </orderedlist> >> > > > I think <quote> is better than <q>, since it pairs nicely with <blockquote>. Yes, that is a good point as well. Though the group *did* consider <blockq> instead ;) > Your argument doesn't hold true, however. The WG changed <line> into <l>, a > decision I still think is ludicrous, In my opinion this was a simple as seeking to avoid unnecessary tag name collisions in vocabularies which are likely to be used together (even if namespaces help avoid technical collisions, people *will* confuse the same tag meaning different things in one document). SVG had <line> first, and probably more appropriately so. > given the similarities to the letter i > and the number 1 in some typefaces. Imagine the havoc this sort of thing > could cause: <l>The binary number 111 looks very ill</l> ;) l00k, ar3 u r3411y s4y1ng th3r3'5 a pr0613m h3r3? programmers have had this "problem" for quite some time, hence why most fonts used as defaults in code editors tend to distinguish 0 vs. O, 1 vs. l vs i vs. I etc. I think this is a silly reason to get upset about a tagname. Just pick a better default font in your text editor. And sometimes I think, maybe uppercase tagnames would have been better... Tantek
Received on Saturday, 10 May 2003 20:43:16 UTC