- From: Orion Adrian <orion.adrian@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 12:19:07 -0400
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 10/16/05, Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk> wrote: > > Boris Zbarsky wrote: > > > Well. At some point I'd draw the line and include a graphic of the > > poem. ;) In PDF or SVG or something else reasonably accessible if > > that's needed. Because that's running into the "the presentation is the > > content" end of the spectrum. > > > > But italics come up in other cases too (eg consider a tutorial on > > typographic conventions). > > I'd say even the example of typo*graphic* (if you excuse the emphasis) > conventions falls into that "presentation is content" end, which can't > be marked up with a purely structural language meant for content and > (presentation agnostic) meaning... I would say that a good test to see if something's presentation is content would be to ask yourself how you would present it aurally. If you end up having to describe its visual appearance (e.g. it's italicized, it's times new roman, it's purple), it's presentation as content. It's probably best encoded as a graphic with it's longdesc set to its description above. -- Orion Adrian
Received on Sunday, 16 October 2005 16:19:14 UTC