- From: Paul Nelson (ATC) <paulnel@winse.microsoft.com>
- Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2007 16:26:42 -0800
- To: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, <www-html@w3.org>
It would be great to see a use case that illustrates the need for this type of behavior. Please provide a scenario. Paul -----Original Message----- From: www-html-request@w3.org [mailto:www-html-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Patrick H. Lauke Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 8:21 AM To: www-html@w3.org Subject: Re: [XHTML 2.0] Only one emphasis tag John M. Black wrote: > In principle I > might argue that the "strength" of a particular element is not > something that should be defined in html attributes at all. However, I'd argue that the "strength" in this case influences the meaning/content, hence should be part of the document's markup, and not rely on styling alone. It would also be a lot more elegant than requiring nesting to achieve positive increments, and gives an interesting way out for removing <small> (presentational) without the need to reinvent another element for this purpose. 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 __________________________________________________________ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __________________________________________________________
Received on Monday, 22 January 2007 00:26:14 UTC