Doug Schepers wrote:
Also, IMHO <code> should also be acceptable
in place of <i> when marking up bits of code rather than bits of
English.
4. Use <code> for your code markup, not <span>. That means attributes,
elements, values, etc.
IIRC, <code> wasn't consistently stylable, which is why the SVG WG used
the more complicated nesting of <span
class="attr"><code>foo</code></span>... if there aren't issues anymore,
I'd be very happy to simplify the markup (which I have done in the new
draft).
I have no idea what issues you were having with <code> not being styleable.
I've never run into such problems myself.
Maybe you're complaining about things like
<code><pre>...</pre></code>
not working? That would be because the markup is invalid.
I actually made a typo by leaving them out in the example, which I've
now corrected.
Did you know!? <code> can accept the 'class' and 'id' attributes.
Yes, I sometimes do that, but didn't in the rough draft document since I
was trying to show code in an example block. I could make an example
that uses just <code class="foo">, if you think it would help clarify.
Code in an example block should be inside a <pre>, certainly. What
I'm objecting to is the things like <span class="..."><code>...</code></span>
that you had. The span is excessive.
~fantasai
