Am Sonntag, den 02.11.2008, 19:49 +0200 schrieb Pentasis:
I had my doubts when I heard browser vendors were going to do the next
standard. But I gave them the benefit of the doubt, I had high hopes as
well. I read both the X/HTML5 and the XHTML2 spec over the past two months,
and if I was
* As a style sheet selector (when an author wishes to assign style
information to a set of elements).
* For general purpose processing by user agents.
The first role is clear, it is used for styles (not semantics)
Ian answered to this. You'll similarly or identically style elements
with
On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 3:53 AM, Pentasis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* As a style sheet selector (when an author wishes to assign style
information to a set of elements).
* For general purpose processing by user agents.
The first role is clear, it is used for styles (not semantics)
Ian
The problem with your entire reply is that you take the last remarks and
respond to them out of context, but just on a final note:
No, you're misunderstanding. *Why* are you styling some footnotes
differently?
I never said I am styling footnotes differently. I merely poiiunted out that
All I can say is that I think discussions on this list are of a very
closed,
almost defensive nature. But perhaps that is my own fault.
Your only fault, just like me, was to believe this was a serious place
for discussion. But it isn't: it is just a tool: feedback praising
the spec will be
On Oct 31, 2008, at 7:57 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
That's what the class attribute is for.
What's the difference then between mark and span then? I mean,
does
the mark element provide anything that span with an appropriate
class wouldn't?
A default style when there's no CSS support, support
The spec already describes how to do footnotes:
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#footnotes
Yes, but this is a theoretical explanation that does not provide a
consistent, practical solution.
As the mark element has different usages defined on it already why not
On Sat, 1 Nov 2008, Andy Lyttle wrote:
On Oct 31, 2008, at 7:57 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
That's what the class attribute is for.
What's the difference then between mark and span then? I mean,
does the mark element provide anything that span with an
appropriate class wouldn't?
Yes, but this is a theoretical explanation that does not provide a
consistent, practical solution.
I don't understand why these solutions aren't consistent or practical.
First of all, the spec admits it itself:
HTML does not have a dedicated mechanism for marking up footnotes. Here are
the
On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 11:13 AM, Pentasis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, but this is a theoretical explanation that does not provide a
consistent, practical solution.
I don't understand why these solutions aren't consistent or practical.
First of all, the spec admits it itself:
HTML does
Grouping and such is a stylistic concern, though - as long as the document
expresses a footnote semantic, that's all it has to do. For the rest, we have
a CSS Module that will cover that area, the Generated and Replaced Content
module [1]. By an astonishing coincidence, the editor of this
First of all, I'd like to avoid any missunderstandings: I have nothing
against the mark element itself; although I'm afraid my previous
e-mails may lead to think otherwise. It could be a really good
addition to HTML but, IMHO, it isn't yet, and I'm trying to show why I
think so.
On Sat, Nov 1,
I hope I am doing this right, I am not used to mailing lists ;-)
Anyway, following some discussions on the web regarding footnotes/side notes
I have found that there is a need for some form of element to mark these up.
The most commonly accepted element at the moment seems to be to use the
On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 4:52 PM, Pentasis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I hope I am doing this right, I am not used to mailing lists ;-)
Anyway, following some discussions on the web regarding footnotes/side notes
I have found that there is a need for some form of element to mark these up.
The
On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 4:52 PM, Pentasis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I hope I am doing this right, I am not used to mailing lists ;-)
Anyway, following some discussions on the web regarding footnotes/side
notes
I have found that there is a need for some form of element to mark these
up.
The
On Oct 31, 2008, at 11:06 AM, Pentasis wrote:
I would never opt for using class for anything other than CSS
styling. The reason for this being that I feel that neither id
nor class should contain keywords, but only author defined words.
For me a type or role attribute would be like an id
On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Pentasis wrote:
Anyway, following some discussions on the web regarding footnotes/side
notes I have found that there is a need for some form of element to mark
these up. The most commonly accepted element at the moment seems to be
to use the small element. But this is
On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 7:29 PM, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Pentasis wrote:
[...]
As the mark element has different usages defined on it already why not
include a type attribute (or similar) that defines what it is used
for. One of these types would then be
On Sat, 1 Nov 2008, Eduard Pascual wrote:
On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 7:29 PM, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Pentasis wrote:
[...]
As the mark element has different usages defined on it already why not
include a type attribute (or similar) that defines what it is
19 matches
Mail list logo
