El vie, 07-05-2004 a las 17:37, Andy Budd escribi�:
> Manuel Gonz�lez Noriega wrote:
> 
> > Well it's pretty tricky picking between two wrongs but i'd say wrong
> > named classes are much less serious than wrongfully marked elements.
> 
> Why is marking something up as italic wrong though? 

For one thing, it fixes the element to a medium (visual). If you
'span'n'style' it, you get back the freedom to export the meaning to
different mediums.

It's not wrong like it's a crime or unethical or something. It's just
that every example i've seen of 'a fair use of i' could/should be
reformulated.

In every example (foreign language, scientific names, etc..) when
someone tells me they want to mark something up as italic, i think 'no,
you want to mark it up as belonging to a certain class *and then* saying
that certain class should appear as italic.

I'm aware is a fairly obscure technical-philosophical issue and that one
man's 'true way' could be seen as 'markupbation' by others  :-)

It may go against 
> your belief of separating content from display, but it's a valid 
> (x)html element isn't it?

Of course! If it wouldn't validate that would be quite the end of the
discussion, wouldn't it? Still, a validator won't tell you if you're
using the right tag for the job. That's a job for collective
brainstormings like this.
> 
> Seems like using <i> or <span class="italic"> are pretty much the same. 
> In fact you could argue that using <li> is better because it's a 
> standard html element (rather than a user defined class) and will thus 
> be understood by more systems.

The incorrect naming of the span class is what it's making it pretty
much the same. If the name of the class would describe the function
rather than the visual presentation, then there would be a clear
difference.

> I'd still argue that the purpose of the <i> element is to make 
> something italic, so that's exactly how it should be used (not saying 
> that's the only way to make something italicw). Using it to make 
> something bold however would be a shooting offence.

The main issue is choosing between considering <i> 

- a first-class citizen of the (x)HTML world  
- a piece of junk that smells bad and doesn't really has the right to be
in a modern markup job, even though it hasn't been yet erased from the
specs. 
 
(just kidding, <i>, i just think your time has passed. No offense)

> > Personally, i do it because i was told me girls dig semantic coding. 
> > You
> > mean they don't?
> 
> Some do. However some like it the old fashioned way.


Girls who mix content and presentation are a sure mess to get undressed.


BTW, sometimes i feel way beyond my written english skills, excuse me if
my sentences sound aadvark sometimes.

-- 
Manuel trabaja para Simplel�gica, construcci�n web
(+34) 985 22 12 65         http://simplelogica.net 

*****************************************************
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
*****************************************************

Reply via email to