- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 16:51:10 +0100
- To: www-html@w3.org
Quoting Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>: > You seem to be assuming that semantic markup is good for the sake of > semantics. I see semantic markup as merely a means to achieve media > independence. In that case our views diverge at quite a fundamental point, then. > The reality is that normal people don't want to encode > the reason why they italicized something. They just want to select some > text, hit ctrl-i or command-i and be done with it. How do you know what people want, when up to now there hasn't been a choice for them? Given a like-for-like comparison, with an editor that gives them appropriate options to mark something up correctly (genus, shipname, etc), i'd be interested to see what "normal people" do. Again, the argument could be extended to "normal people don't want to use CSS for layout, but just stick a table into their page to position content" etc. Again, doesn't make it right, does it? P -- Patrick H. Lauke ______________________________________________________________ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ______________________________________________________________ Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ ______________________________________________________________ Take it to the streets ... join the WaSP Street Team http://streetteam.webstandards.org/ ______________________________________________________________
Received on Monday, 23 April 2007 15:50:15 UTC