W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > April 2007

Re: HTML5 script start tag should select appropriate content model according to src

From: Tina Holmboe <tina@greytower.net>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 18:03:37 +0200
To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Cc: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, www-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <20070423160337.GG15848@greytower.net>

On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 06:31:52PM +0300, Henri Sivonen wrote:

> In writing that uses the Latin script, italicization is more sticky  
> than the typeface. Hence, italics are closer to being part of the  
> content.

  No, it is part of the presentation. The acid test apply: if you
  remove the italics, will the content /still/ be "Latin"? If
  yes, then the italics is presentational, and vice versa: if you
  make a word italics, is it then also Latin? If not, then it
  isn't structural.

> 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  

  Philip is, in such a case, not alone in making that assumption
  I would be quite interested in hearing you explain
  what 'semantic markup' is good for if not for /semantics/.

  And frankly, no, 'media independence' doesn't make much sense in
  this context. A DIV with styling set in various media-specific
  stylesheets would be media independent, but not much of worth

> independence. 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.

  If people, as you yourself say, has no interest in using the I-element
  for semantic purposes, then why is anyone at all suggesting replacing
  the previous definition - it's presentational - with a new one
  that specify it to have a semantic meaning which people, again
  according to yourself, have no interest in using?

  Yes, people *do* want to italicize text that way. Fix the
  authoring tools to style the text the way the author want it instead
  of giving a up-to-this-point /presentational/ element which ought be
  removed semantic interpretation.

  This is a /very/ minor issue, but important, and should have been
  out of the WA1 long before now - and certainly shouldn't be a
  basis for a new version of HTML!

 - Tina Holmboe
Received on Monday, 23 April 2007 16:04:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 30 April 2020 16:21:02 UTC