- From: Orion Adrian <oadrian@hotmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2004 17:19:34 -0500
- To: jkorpela@cs.tut.fi, www-html@w3.org
> > But again, you can use markup for such situations very well -- that's > > what <code> is for. (Or at least, it should be...) > >So you mean you would accept <nobr> in the <code> disguise? Then I think >you haven't understood the problem. > I think I understand the problem and I think he's right. I think though there is a semantic difference between code (e.g. C, C++, HTML, Java) and a code (e.g. %20, $abc). One should allow normal breaking rules and one shouldn't. This is an English problem mostly in that one person sees code meaning one thing and another sees code meaning something else. This is one area the W3C could do much better in (i.e. defining the exact meaning of each semantic markup). Here's the greater problem... there are so many semantic cases in the real world that anyone trying to accomplish a general-purpose semantic markup is going to have to choose along a continuum of choices. On one end you have giving up entirely and just encoding presentation and on the other end you have semantic markup for everything. I've found that the HTML Working Group so far has decided to go somewhere in the middle. Markup like sub, sup, hr, nobr are presentation classes because going along and making up semantic cases for all the nitty gritty little cases is too big a task for this working group. So my point is that if you desire total purity look to these other cases as well. Concentrating all our effort on nobr without looking at the whole problem is just wasting everybody's time in my opinion. There is a much bigger problem at hand here, let's not concentrate on the minutia. Orion Adrian _________________________________________________________________ Tax headache? MSN Money provides relief with tax tips, tools, IRS forms and more! http://moneycentral.msn.com/tax/workshop/welcome.asp
Received on Friday, 2 April 2004 17:20:05 UTC