On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 03:01:30PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > On Thu, Apr 16 2009, Giacomo Catenazzi wrote: > > > Manoj Srivastava wrote: > >> - Ability to recognize and render the following logical entities, in > >> decreasing order of importance: > >> + unordered lists > >> + ordered lists > > > > really needed? > > I would think these are the guts of this proposal. Or else what > are we discussing here? > > > > >> + emphasis > >> + strong emphasis > >> + definition lists > >> + hypertext links > >> + underlines, and strike throughs > > > > I don't think they are needed. > > Why not? If rendering a description in a manner that makes it > easier to read is the goal, I fail to see why emphasis and strong > emphasis is a bad idea (think of text-to-speech mechanisms). This is > not just opinions we are discussing here, we should be looking at use > cases for marking up a textual description. > > > Underlines is generally bad, strike throughs are worse ;-) > > So you say. Don't use them, then. There are cases where either > one of these constructs have value; and you should not impose your > personal aesthetics on a general policy discussion. Just as a kind of clarification: Manoj, I think that Giacomo's comments were only to the *last* item of the text he quoted, not to the whole portion above it :) Thus, IMHO his first "really needed?" question referred specifically to the "ordered lists" item, and the "I don't think they are needed" referred specifically to the "underlines and strike-throughs", not to the emphasis, strong emphasis, etc. G'luck, Peter -- Peter Pentchev roam@ringlet.net roam@space.bg roam@FreeBSD.org PGP key: http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc Key fingerprint FDBA FD79 C26F 3C51 C95E DF9E ED18 B68D 1619 4553 If this sentence didn't exist, somebody would have invented it.
Attachment:
pgpIEd1otcQNZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature