home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- In-reply-to: Bill Janssen's message of Thu, 27 May 93 10:41:55 PDT.
- > Excerpts from ext.WorldWideWeb: 27-May-93 Re: RE dtd2.html
- > Dave_Raggett@hplb.hpl.hp (3410)
- > > > + I am not sure that STRONG, B, I, and U are desirable as
- > > > elements. These formatting characteristics ought to
- > > I don't like them either. They are present in HTML to support
- > > importing (scanned) documents for which a filter has no way of deciding
- > > the original meaning.
- > This justification doesn't sound terribly good. If we can't infer the
- > meaning of the font changes, perhaps translating the scanned document to
- > HTML is inappropriate; perhaps the scanned document should be stored in
- > TeX or Postscript or GIF, depending on what other image characteristics
- > of the document seem important. Or perhaps the font change information
- > should simply be discarded on conversion to HTML, as it does not
- > translate to meaning.
-
- I use them for preserving man page formatting _^HX_^HY_^HZ gets translated
- to <I>XYZ</I>. If you don't like them and believe they are void of content
- then simply ignore them in your browser. I believe that since HTML is
- more of a delivery vechicle than a formal markup language they are required
- because HTML cannot be all things to all people. I VERY much agree that
- tags should be semantic but in a delivery format I think you need to leave
- a little room for slop.
-
- If you remove <I> and <B> what will happen instead of using TeX or whatever
- people will use stuff like <CITE> (or whatever formats nice in their browser)
- where it is inappropriate (assuming you removed <EM> and <STRONG> for
- the same reasons).
-
- If you resort to an external format how are you going to deal with hypertext
- links? I may not be able to figure out why foo was in italics but I can
- sure as heck generate a hypertext link to man pages from text like
- ``foo(1)''.
-
- --sanders
-
-