- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 13:06:26 +0200
- To: www-html@w3.org
Lachlan Hunt wrote: > > David Hammond wrote: > >> I was pretty startled when I saw that XHTML 2.0 introduced two >> versions each of the quote and code elements: one for inline and one >> for block. I don't see why an element's implied display property >> should have anything to do with its symantic value. I feel it's purely >> presentational and the implied display value should only be part of a >> default stylesheet, and not a property of the element itself. > > I think I did a reasonable job of summing up the various questions and > attempted to answer some of them in this long post [3], however I > suggest you read (or at least skim) the enitre thread which will give > you a very good insight into the various arguments for and against. > > [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2003Dec/0123.html I think this bit is key: | A block element generally indicates a logical division or section | large enough to stand on its own, whereas the inline equivalents | generally contain smaller fragments that don't necessarily make | sense out of the context of their containing element. Nesting an inline fragment of code inside a section doesn't convey the same structure as a block-level code element. The one implies an inline fragment inside a larger block which just happens to not have any content in it. The other is an independent block-of-code (rather than code-in-block). An inline code fragment is something that is part of the running text of a paragraph, part of a sentence. A block of code is something referenced by the surrounding text but not read inline, as it were. ~fantasai -- http://fantasai.inkedblade.net/contact
Received on Thursday, 29 July 2004 07:06:53 UTC