> <small> may sound presentational because that's what it is in HTML4. > But in HTML5 it refers to 'the small print' of a document, which is an > entirely different use of text from a standard paragraph.
The problem with that is that it *does* sound presentational and that people will just assume that it's the kind of tag to use to make small text, rather than use it in the framework it's intended to be used in. > What the WHATWG are doing which I think is clever, is they're reusing > existing, meaningless presentational elements where they can. If I > remember correctly, <i> has been re-specified too. Quite the contrary, it's asking for problems. Between people who aren't aware that the specification change, browsers lagging behind, and WYSIWYG editor still using the deprecated elements in their previous meaning, we'll end up with a bigger mess than we find ourselves in now. How long have <i> and <b> been deprecated? Why are some editors still using it? Do you *really* think that a re-specification will catch on? Don't' get me wrong, I'm glad to see "action" on those fronts, but I'm not sure that using existing elements and re-defining them is the brightest approach. YMMV :) Nic ****************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ******************************************************
