Andrew Cunningham wrote:
Christian Montoya wrote:
Ben Buchanan wrote:
> Personally I think glyphs/entities in HTML should have been tags with
> alt or title attributes.
I assume when Ben wrote "glyph" he meant "character". A glyph is a
visual representation of character that can vary between languages,
geographic regions and typographic traditions, etc.
And browsers, the character comes out very differently between IE 6 and
Firefox 1.5
If you used the Unicode character <U+2116>, this is a character (part of
the data or text) and not an abbreviation.
BUT, at the same time, it is.
. - _ ^ & are not abbreviations, I accept that.
But No. is an abbreviation for number. It's just that there is a special
character/glyph for that particular abbreviation. So do you mark it up
as an abbreviation or not, or is the abbreviation implied in the use of
that character?
Kat
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
