Re: [WSG] XHTML 1.1 Presentation Module
Douglas, Personal attacks are not acceptable on this list and, in most cases, offenders will be unsubscribed. "The list administrators reserve the right to unsubscribe any member from the list. Reasons include: Unfriendly, abusive, disrespectful or rude behaviour..." http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm If you have something to add, make it relevant to the topic, rather than attempting to derail the discussion with petty remarks. Ben WSG Core ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] XHTML 1.1 Presentation Module
Pardon me for continuing this off-topicness, but this just caught my attention BIG TIME. On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 23:12:54 +, Patrick H. Lauke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ah, thank you for the usual Chewbacca defense...when a discussion on > standards doesn't go the way you like, just point the validator at one > of the other person's sites and point at their errors. The fact that one > of my team (oh yes, team...or did you think I was the only one working > on a large University site?) borked a recent change obviously diminishes > any of the points I made in the discussion...*sigh* Worse is picking a personal/corporate site and think that showcases someone's abilities. Pardon me, but my markup doesn't show that I know all specs quite well, and funnily enough, people haven't even started to me on that. They know that sometimes you don't get to showcase your (maybe even supreme) knowledge through a personal site, or even worse, a client's site. Sorry people, but this is ridiculous. Patrick, hope you will just ignore this from now on. We oughta know better than that. (Respect to Chewbacca though.) -- Cheers, Rob. http://zooibaai.nl | http://digital-proof.org | http://chancecube.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] XHTML 1.1 Presentation Module
Douglas Clifton wrote: Perhaps you spend a little more time with syntax and a little less time spouting about perfect "semantic" markup. I'll spend my time however I please, thank you for your concern. URI: http://www.salford.ac.uk/ "This page is not Valid XHTML 1.0 Strict!" http://shop.salford.ac.uk";>Online shop Oops! Ah, thank you for the usual Chewbacca defense...when a discussion on standards doesn't go the way you like, just point the validator at one of the other person's sites and point at their errors. The fact that one of my team (oh yes, team...or did you think I was the only one working on a large University site?) borked a recent change obviously diminishes any of the points I made in the discussion...*sigh* What's even more laughable is you're sending 1.0 Strict to the validator as text/html because, as everyone knows, even though the W3C validator understands XTHML perfectly, it does not send the correct Accept header when it makes the request for your page. Laughable...of course. Again, as per spec HTML compatible XHTML 1.0 Strict may be sent as text/html. Sure, let me go and compensate for the validator not sending the correct Accept header by sniffing out its specific user agent. So, let's see: IE is broken, and to hell with it; W3C validator is sending out incorrect headers, so need to compensate. Got it. -- Patrick H. Lauke _ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] XHTML 1.1 Presentation Module
Patrick, Perhaps you spend a little more time with syntax and a little less time spouting about perfect "semantic" markup. Personally, I could care less about sending XHTML 1.0 to IE as text/html. Or sending self-closing element tags either. It's a borked browser on so many fronts to begin with anyway. URI: http://www.salford.ac.uk/ "This page is not Valid XHTML 1.0 Strict!" http://shop.salford.ac.uk";>Online shop Oops! What's even more laughable is you're sending 1.0 Strict to the validator as text/html because, as everyone knows, even though the W3C validator understands XTHML perfectly, it does not send the correct Accept header when it makes the request for your page. Which is pretty much moot since you're not even closing your tags anyway. Ouch! -- Douglas Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://loadaveragezero.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
RE: [WSG] XHTML 1.1 Presentation Module
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick H. Lauke Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2005 2:57 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] XHTML 1.1 Presentation Module Trusz, Andrew wrote: > Here's how xhtml2.0 defines the text module which includes [sup] [...] > Note in particular the phrase "in this case it is intended to only > have a semantic meaning." That seems pretty clear. While that may or > may not be the current definition of [sup], it certainly seems to be > headed for a structural/semantic definition since it is defined in this module. So split hairs, "in this case *IT* is intended to only have a semantic meaning". The "semantic meaning" bit only refers to the use of the phrase 'inline level', not to the elements themselves... However, I'm waiting with baited breath to see how they're going to define the semantics of elements which are presentational already in their name, and can contain such disparate types of content as mathematic exponents and french abbreviations. I'll be the 1st one to cheer when it happens... -- Patrick H. Lauke _ You can let out your breath. The semantic meaning for the inline use is defined for the elements, attributes and content models defined in the module. That's the meaning of the entire paragraph: these are inline elements which have a structural meaning and those meanings are defined in this module. That's what the paragraph says; that's what the rule says. The [sup] element means superscript. The user agent is indicating that some element is a superscript. The content will provide the ontological framework for recognizing which meaning the user should attach to the superscript. So, an aural browser would provide very different renderings of "e=mc2" and "e=mc[sup]2". When that rendering is seen or heard, the context can be understood: a math expression, a date, a french abbreviation, etc. Language is sloppy, sloppy, sloppy. It's worth remembering that the point of providing structural/semantic meaning to elements is to make it possible for machines to catch some of the sophistication hidden in that sloppiness. Inevitably, there will be friction between machine precision and human flexibility. Developing rules for every situation would result in a system so cumbersome that it would simply not be used -- which we almost have with sgml. Who knows, different definitions of [sup] may be broken out just as nl is extracted in xhtml2.0 from ul. Practice at times begets theory. drew ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] XHTML 1.1 Presentation Module
Trusz, Andrew wrote: Here's how xhtml2.0 defines the text module which includes [sup] [...] Note in particular the phrase "in this case it is intended to only have a semantic meaning." That seems pretty clear. While that may or may not be the current definition of [sup], it certainly seems to be headed for a structural/semantic definition since it is defined in this module. So split hairs, "in this case *IT* is intended to only have a semantic meaning". The "semantic meaning" bit only refers to the use of the phrase 'inline level', not to the elements themselves... However, I'm waiting with baited breath to see how they're going to define the semantics of elements which are presentational already in their name, and can contain such disparate types of content as mathematic exponents and french abbreviations. I'll be the 1st one to cheer when it happens... -- Patrick H. Lauke _ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] XHTML 1.1 Presentation Module
I can gather from this exchange, although the elements have not been deprecated, they should not be included in clean semantic markup? One could argue that the replacement of i, b, sup, sub, tt, and hr with spans, classes, and the like are equally unclean semantically. What is the semantic difference between these two bits? Einstein's Gedankenexperiment about being a photon led to E = mc class="mathExponent">2. ...or: Einstein's Gedankenexperiment about being a photon led to E = mc2. Since the presentational tags are empty like span, these are semantically equivalent. The difference, I suppose, is trying to be forward compatible with XHTML2 -- a ludicrous idea at this time, IMO. This standpoint (I'm not sure I agree) I've found best articulated here: http://mpt.kiwiwebhost.net/archive/2004/05/02/b-and-i http://mpt.kiwiwebhost.net/archive/2004/05/09/semantic -- Ben Curtis : webwright bivia : a personal web studio http://www.bivia.com v: (818) 507-6613 ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
RE: [WSG] XHTML 1.1 Presentation Module
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick H. Lauke Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2005 1:06 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] XHTML 1.1 Presentation Module > Examples: > E = mc2 > Mlle Dupont [/quote] That still doesn't make it semantic, sorry. If nothing else, the emphasis on "rendered/rendering" reinforces the idea it's a presentational aspect. It doesn't define WHAT it is (semantics), only HOW it's presented. -- Patrick H. Lauke _ *** Here's how xhtml2.0 defines the text module which includes [sup] "9. XHTML Text Module This section is normative. This module defines all of the basic text container elements, attributes, and their content models that are "inline level". Note that while the concept of "inline level" can be construed as a presentation aspect, in this case it is intended to only have a semantic meaning." Note in particular the phrase "in this case it is intended to only have a semantic meaning." That seems pretty clear. While that may or may not be the current definition of [sup], it certainly seems to be headed for a structural/semantic definition since it is defined in this module. drew ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] XHTML 1.1 Presentation Module
Vlad Alexander (XStandard) wrote: [quote:] Separators: in previous versions of HTML, the hr element was used to separate sections of a text from each other. In retrospect, the name hr (for horizontal rule) was badly chosen, because an hr was neither necessarily horizontal (in vertical text it was vertical), nor necessarily a rule (books often use other typographical methods to represent separators, such as a line of three asterisks, and stylesheets can be used to give you this freedom). In order to emphasize its structuring nature, and to make it clearer that it has no essential directionality, hr has been renamed separator. [/quote] I wasn't disputing whether or not is semantic or not. I was suggesting that simply saying "the W3C use it on their site" is not an argument that holds too much weight. [quote] For visual user agents this element [] would normally be rendered as a super-script of the text baseline, but on user agents where this is not possible (for instance teletype-like devices) other renderings may be used. For instance, 2n that would be rendered as 2n on a device that can render it so, might be rendered as 2↑(n) on a simpler device. Many scripts (e.g., French) require superscripts or subscripts for proper rendering. The sub and sup elements should be used to markup text in these cases. Examples: E = mc2 Mlle Dupont [/quote] That still doesn't make it semantic, sorry. If nothing else, the emphasis on "rendered/rendering" reinforces the idea it's a presentational aspect. It doesn't define WHAT it is (semantics), only HOW it's presented. -- Patrick H. Lauke _ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] XHTML 1.1 Presentation Module
Hi Patrick, The following is take from: http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/xhtml2.html Before somebody smart in this list points out that this document is a working draft, let me say that (1) there are other sources that say the same thing - I don't have time to hunt for them right now and (2) I am only referring to sections that talk about the past or have not changed and (3) this document is more descriptive than other sources. [quote:] Separators: in previous versions of HTML, the hr element was used to separate sections of a text from each other. In retrospect, the name hr (for horizontal rule) was badly chosen, because an hr was neither necessarily horizontal (in vertical text it was vertical), nor necessarily a rule (books often use other typographical methods to represent separators, such as a line of three asterisks, and stylesheets can be used to give you this freedom). In order to emphasize its structuring nature, and to make it clearer that it has no essential directionality, hr has been renamed separator. [/quote] [quote] For visual user agents this element [] would normally be rendered as a super-script of the text baseline, but on user agents where this is not possible (for instance teletype-like devices) other renderings may be used. For instance, 2n that would be rendered as 2n on a device that can render it so, might be rendered as 2↑(n) on a simpler device. Many scripts (e.g., French) require superscripts or subscripts for proper rendering. The sub and sup elements should be used to markup text in these cases. Examples: E = mc2 Mlle Dupont [/quote] Regards, -Vlad http://xstandard.com Patrick Lauke wrote: >>Vlad Alexander (XStandard) > > >> and are not presentational. > > > I beg to differ...they are entirely visual. > > >>There is a valid need >>for superscript and subscript in markup. For example: >> >>E = mc2 > > > Again, that's visual markup. It doesn't say "M C squared", > but "M C and then a 2 that lives a little higher up than > the rest of the text". HTML was never meant to mark up > mathematical expressions...that's what MathML is for. > I've seen used for referencing footnotes as well... > so you see it's not that has > semantic value, but it's purely describing the visual appearance. > > > >>W3C uses a hidden tag on >>the home page to separate page content from the copyright info. > > > The W3C site is not always the best example for the purest, most > semantic use of markup, css, accessibility or anything else, so > - regardless of this actual discussion on - I wouldn't use > something found in their markup as an absolute proof. > > Patrick > > Patrick H. Lauke > Webmaster / University of Salford > http://www.salford.ac.uk > ** > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > ** > > ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] XHTML 1.1 Presentation Module
Hi, I can gather from this exchange, although the elements have not been deprecated, they should not be included in clean semantic markup? Thanks C On Thursday, March 24, 2005, at 09:06 AM, Patrick Lauke wrote: Vlad Alexander (XStandard) and are not presentational. I beg to differ...they are entirely visual. There is a valid need for superscript and subscript in markup. For example: E = mc2 Again, that's visual markup. It doesn't say "M C squared", but "M C and then a 2 that lives a little higher up than the rest of the text". HTML was never meant to mark up mathematical expressions...that's what MathML is for. I've seen used for referencing footnotes as well... so you see it's not that has semantic value, but it's purely describing the visual appearance. W3C uses a hidden tag on the home page to separate page content from the copyright info. The W3C site is not always the best example for the purest, most semantic use of markup, css, accessibility or anything else, so - regardless of this actual discussion on - I wouldn't use something found in their markup as an absolute proof. Patrick Patrick H. Lauke Webmaster / University of Salford http://www.salford.ac.uk ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** "The true measure of ignorance is thinking intelligence is the solution to everything." -ck Chris Kennon Principal ckimedia (www.ckimedia.com) e-mail: ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) blog: (http://thebardwire.blogspot.com/) ph: (619)429-3258 fax: (619)429-3258 ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
RE: [WSG] XHTML 1.1 Presentation Module
> Vlad Alexander (XStandard) > and are not presentational. I beg to differ...they are entirely visual. > There is a valid need > for superscript and subscript in markup. For example: > > E = mc2 Again, that's visual markup. It doesn't say "M C squared", but "M C and then a 2 that lives a little higher up than the rest of the text". HTML was never meant to mark up mathematical expressions...that's what MathML is for. I've seen used for referencing footnotes as well... so you see it's not that has semantic value, but it's purely describing the visual appearance. > W3C uses a hidden tag on > the home page to separate page content from the copyright info. The W3C site is not always the best example for the purest, most semantic use of markup, css, accessibility or anything else, so - regardless of this actual discussion on - I wouldn't use something found in their markup as an absolute proof. Patrick Patrick H. Lauke Webmaster / University of Salford http://www.salford.ac.uk ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] XHTML 1.1 Presentation Module
Hi Chris, , , and are still in the spec. But it's best practice not to use them. Don't know really why they were not taken out or deprecated. and are not presentational. There is a valid need for superscript and subscript in markup. For example: E = mc2 (horizontal rule) is a misnomer. is used to separate sections of a text from each other. In XHTML 2.0 it will be renamed to . W3C uses a hidden tag on the home page to separate page content from the copyright info. Regards, -Vlad http://xstandard.com Standards-compliant XHTML WYSIWYG editor Chris Kennon wrote: > Hi, > > I thought these elements were deprecated: > > Presentation Module > b, big, hr, i, small, sub, sup, tt > > > But there existence in XHMTL 1.1 specification contradicts this > assumption. Have the been ostracized by the web development community? I > can remember being frowned upon as far back as Dave Siegel > "Designing Killer Web Sites". > > > > CK > __ > "Knowing is not enough, you must apply; > willing is not enough, you must do." > ---Bruce Lee > > ** > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > ** > > ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
