On Wed, 01 Nov 2006 08:56:05 +0100, Michael(tm) Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
If the design criteria were to try to keep names of new elements
reasonably short while still having unobscure meanings, then
<time> and <term> would seem to meet that criteria, and <m> would
better be <mark>. But I'm not sure what the criteria are. I mean,
what's the rationale behind having <meter> and <progress> while
reducing the name of the date/time element to <t>?
Well, if done correctly, you would probably use <t>, <x> and <m> a lot.
Where <meter> and <progress> don't really appear that often.
--
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
