[Standards] Call for Experience: Advancement of XEP-0071 (XHTML-IM) to Final
stpeter at stpeter.im
Wed Nov 28 13:10:40 UTC 2012
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 11/17/12 5:41 AM, Kevin Smith wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Peter Saint-Andre
> <stpeter at stpeter.im> wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
>> On 10/15/12 12:21 AM, Andreas Kuckartz wrote:
>>> I agree with that sentiment. Green-colored text and strange
>>> fonts were popular when MySpace was popular. This is something
>>> from the past, not the present or future.
>>> The present and future require semantic elements (such as
>>> <blockquote/>) and attributes (such as those used by RDFa).
>> I think that's right. So how about the following change...
>> OLD The use of structural elements is NOT RECOMMENDED where
>> presentational styles are desired, which is why very few
>> structural elements are specified herein. Implementations SHOULD
>> use appropriate 'style' attributes (e.g., <span
>> style='font-weight: bold'>this is bold</span> and <p
>> style='margin-left: 5%'>this is indented</p>) rather than XHTML
>> structural elements (e.g., <strong/> and <blockquote/>) wherever
>> NEW Where strictly presentational style are desired (e.g.,
>> colored text), it might be necessary to use use 'style'
>> attributes (e.g., <span style='font-color: green'>this is
>> green</span>). However, where possible it is instead RECOMMENDED
>> to use appropriate structural elements (e.g., <strong/> and
>> <blockquote/> instead of, say, style='font-weight: bold' or
>> style='margin-left: 5%').
> As long as we're not changing the subset of tags allowed, this
> seems sensible to me.
Right, no changes to the subset of tags.
I'll publish a new version and the Council can decide how it would
like to proceed.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.18 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Standards