On Fri, 4 Jun 2010, Jari Aalto wrote:
Instead of <span class="bold"> use <b> or <strong>.
Instead of <span class="emphasis"> use <i> or <emph>.
This may make HTML simpler, but the change would actually degrade the
versality. The SPAN elements can be freely manipulated via CSS, whereas the
<B> and <I> tags have a distinct meaning.
Yes. That is the exact reasoning I had when I did it that way from the start
and of course it is also combined with the second remark:
Likewise. It is good that the headings have distinct identifiers from
the start. This allows the ability to "embed" the HTML somewhere else
and not the interfere with the exixting "H" definitions. Like:
h1
{
/* regular */
}
h2.nroffsh
{
/* from roffit */
}
In this regard I'm inclined to not recommend these changes. Daniel, the
author, can comment more.
Being able to include the roffit HTML code embedded in another existing HTML
page without too much trouble (and of course then subsequently being able to
modify the look of the roffit HTML parts only from the CSS) has been one of my
goals since day 1 so this isn't anything I want to hamper in any way.
Thus, I don't consider this a bug at all.
--
/ daniel.haxx.se
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
