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

Re: Cleaning House

From: Jim Jewett <jimjjewett@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 6 May 2007 12:10:31 -0400
Message-ID: <fb6fbf560705060910g404019f2y20886f4f9905ddce@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Tina Holmboe" <tina@greytower.co.uk>
Cc: "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>, "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com>, "Philip & Le Khanh" <Philip-and-LeKhanh@royal-tunbridge-wells.org>, www-html@w3.org, public-html@w3.org

On 5/6/07, Tina Holmboe <tina@greytower.co.uk> wrote:

[ Using '<b style="position: absolute ; top: 150px;">' to mean 'header' ]

>   It doesn't matter. It /is/ a real-world example of why the
>   B-element /cannot/ be redefined as being equal to STRONG;
>   the rarity of misuse notwithstanding.

Sure it can.  That page was already broken; in some GUI browsers it
would (and still will) produce a result that many people will see as a
synonym for "header", but (from a prescriptivist standpoint) it wasn't
(and still isn't) a real header.

If the parsing fallbacks were dropped, and b were defined strictly as
a fallback for strong -- it would continue to be prescriptively wrong,
but it would still produce something that many people would see as a
synonym for header, just as they do in printed pages.

Received on Sunday, 6 May 2007 16:10:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 30 April 2020 16:21:03 UTC