- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 12:33:47 +0100
- To: "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>
- Cc: "www-validator@w3.org" <www-validator@w3.org>, "j.j." <moz@jeka.info>
Jukka K. Korpela, Fri, 28 Mar 2014 23:10:42 +0200: > 2014-03-28 21:44, Leif Halvard Silli wrote: > >> Indeed. After all, <strike> and <s> are synonyms. >> >> Leif H >> >> j.j., Fri, 28 Mar 2014 19:03:42 +0100: >>> The validator warns about <strike>: >>> >>> "The strike element is obsolete. Use CSS instead." >>> >>> It should recommend to use <s> instead. > > In browser reality, and by HTML 4.01, <strike> and <s> are > synonymous, but by HTML5 CR, which is what matters here, they are > not. The <s> element is conforming, whereas <strike> is not, and > <strike> has no definition. Well, I don't see that that make them not synonyms. HTML5 in fact says: ”strike Use del instead if the element is marking an edit, otherwise use s instead. ” http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/obsolete.html#strike > In the HTML5 logic, which is not very logical, but by which > validators should work, <strike> is an obsolete, nonconforming, ugly, > naughty, impure, cursed presentational tag, whereas <s> is a proud > Semantic tag. By that logic, <s> should be used instead of <strike> > only in the very special case where the some semantics was meant to > be implied by <strike> and this accidentally happens to coincide with > the semantics of <s>. Yes, it is true that del should be used if strike was used to signify del semantics, while s should be used if strike was used to signify s semantics. I suppose that HTM5 expresses itself the way it does because it does not make any assumptions about whether those who use <strike> has used its correctly (that is: as a <s>) or not. This makes some sense since the semantics of <s> perhaps can be said to have been altered. Leif
Received on Saturday, 29 March 2014 11:34:18 UTC