forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steven Noels <>
Subject Re: more validation suckage..
Date Thu, 21 Nov 2002 15:25:52 GMT
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:

> David Crossley wrote:
>>On Tue, 2002-11-19 at 15:31, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
>>>        <dt><strong><anchor id="ApacheCon"/>ApacheCon</strong></dt>
>>Easy, the only child element that is allowed inside <strong>
>>is <code>, i.e definitely not <anchor>
> well, *that's* excessively lame.  what reason could there possibly
> be for such a restrictive list?  <strong><em> is, as an example, a
> very common construct..

I'm not necessarily OK with that, since it smells pretty much like 
trying to bypass semantical markup practices.

What if a skin author decides <strong> should be translated to <font 
color="red"> and <em> to <font color="green"> or tweak CSS for that 
reason.... what is the connotation or the meaning of STRONGLY EMPHASIZED 
inline text fragments...?

I know I'm putting on my robe of semantical markup wannabe guru here, 
but we should do some thinking before adding infinite levels of tag 
containment for mostly aesthetical purposes.

Steven Noels                  
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at    
stevenn at                stevenn at

View raw message