verdy_p at wanadoo.fr
Tue Jun 10 08:53:00 CDT 2014
2014-06-10 15:33 GMT+02:00 Leonardo Boiko <leoboiko at namakajiri.net>:
> What about using U+0331 "combining macron below" or U+0320 "combining
> minus below"? Here are some samples:
> 2014-06-10 9:39 GMT-03:00 Philippe Verdy <verdy_p at wanadoo.fr>:
> > (overstriking with <del> or <s> in HTML)
> Modern HTML phased out <s>, and <del> has semantic meanings
> innapropriate for this case. It would be better to use CSS
> "text-decoration: line-through". This point has been raised in the
> comments of the original post.
Yes but these two elements have default styl bindings exactly to the same
king of decoration. The semantics of "del" is in fact appropriate in this
case to mark the fact it is not an exact quotation, but the content is
still skept as it gives the intended idea.
<s> will not be phased out for the same reason that <small>, <big>, <b>,
<i> will be kept. My opinion is that it is even better to use these
elements than fixing a dependancy to some style="" attributes spread
everywhere in the document. These elements give useful placements where you
can contextually apply the styles matching your presentation, they carry
the semantic that style does not carry at all (because they are not
"cascading" even if they are written with CSS.
What makes the cascade in CSS is not what you put in styles, but it is the
structure of elements in the document, that you can contextually and
semantically preserve in your "selectors".
so <del>"</del" has the correct semantic meaning: not a real quotation mark
because the content is not an exact quotation and was written by the same
author as the rest of the unquoted text. Its presentation in fact does not
matter if you want to present <del> another way.
you could as well use a <q class="quasi">...</q>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Unicode