Bill Walton wrote: > On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Greg Donald <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 11:18 AM, Marnen Laibow-Koser >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I didn't say it was invalid HTML. �I said it was *bad practice*. >> >> Yeah, that's why it's in the spec, 'cause no one should use it. >> >> /rolls eyes > > +1. If only marnen were in charge.... ;-)
The HTML 5 spec itself says <b> is only to be used as a last resort if no other element is more appropriate. IMHO, that's never the case: even if nothing more specific can be found, <span> is more appropriate than <b>. I assume <b> is in the spec for backward compatibility with legacy markup. One more time: I didn't say <b> is invalid. I didn't say <b> should be removed from the spec. I didn't say I wanted to be in charge of the HTML 5 spec. I said <b> is bad practice and should be avoided. I stand by that statement. Best, -- Marnen Laibow-Koser http://www.marnen.org [email protected] -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
