> > All these elements are still around [1-4] in the canonical HTML spec > > [5]. Their meanings have changed slightly, making them less > > presentational than in the past. > > I would respectfully disagree. Their meanings have not changed one > iota;
I think this is letter vs. spirit of the spec. The letter has changed, but the spirit… may indeed have not. When it comes to the letter, just compare the wording for e.g. <i>: HTML 4.01 said “[r]enders as italic text style” [1], HTML 5 “represents a span of text in an alternate voice or mood.” I shouldn’t have said “making them less presentational than in the past” I guess, as that suggest things were clear now in terms of these elements serving a well-defined purpose. [1] http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/text-level-semantics.html#the-i-element -- Jens O. Meiert http://meiert.com/en/ ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
