- From: Paul Prescod <papresco@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
- Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 10:31:42 -0400
- To: www-style@w3.org
At 04:29 PM 10/9/96 +0200, Chris Lilley wrote: >On Oct 8, 4:17pm, Gavin Nicol wrote: >It's a tradeoff; if you want a sprinkling of semantic hints and installed >base compatibility, use class in text/html. If you want rich semantic >markup and have no desire for widespread accessibility, use text/sgml >(or application/sgml as appropriate). W3C is working to facilitate both >approaches. Isn't it fair to desire rich semantic markup AND widespread accessibility? I just raise the point because I know that W3C is working on standards for rich semantic markup and I hope that W3C staff and mailing list readers don't see it as perpetually esoteric and inaccessible. Paul Prescod
Received on Wednesday, 9 October 1996 10:36:35 UTC