|
|
Posted by Marcus Stollsteimer on 02/14/06 16:10
Spartanicus wrote:
> Marcus Stollsteimer <marcus314@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>> The basic reason to use most markup is to
>>> apply structure and semantics to the content. In that sense
>>> abbreviations and acronyms are no different from headings and
>>> paragraphs.
>>
>>so what about <noun>, <verb>, <number>, <palindrome> etc. These
>>would also help in clarifying the semantics.
>
> The point I was trying to make is that you shouldn't be to eager to
> deviate from the "markup content for what it is" rule of thumb.
> Having said that, the real world quality of markup can be improved
> by deviating from that rule of thumb in some cases.
>
> I presume that <abbr> and <acronym> are part of HTML4 because at the
> time it was thought that they could provide a useful purpose,
> whereas <noun>, <verb>, <number> and <palindrome> are afaics either
> useless or harmful.
>
> The case for the usefulness of <abbr> and <acronym> is imo at least
> rather questionable, and in some cases their use can cause problems
> in practice. IIRC "<acronym>HTML</acronym>." is read out as "HTML
> dot" by (a) certain speech browser(s), whereas "HTML." is pronounced
> as "HTML".
I think we agree here: an HTML element just for the sake of semantics
makes no sense, it has to serve some purpose. Does <abbr> fulfill
this condition? I'm not sure.
Regards,
Marcus
--
Talking about music is like dancing about architecture.
-- Steve Martin
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|