Re: [whatwg] [html5] r6088 - [e] (0) clarification Fixing http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12165
On Sat, 10 Sep 2011, Shaun Moss wrote: > > On the contrary, I've often seen used with to mark up > pre-formatted code. If you leave out the tag then you've removed > the semantics of the content, plus some source-code highlighting > libraries look specifically for tags. If the tag is left > out and CSS is used to style code elements as pre-formatted, without CSS > classes this interferes with marking up code inline. The spec now says to use both. > However, (perhaps tangential to the topic) as far as I know there are no > rules to say whether the tags should wrap the tags or > vice-versa. isn't allowed inside ( is flow content, 's content model only accepts phrasing content). -- Ian Hickson U+1047E)\._.,--,'``.fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A/, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Re: [whatwg] [html5] r6088 - [e] (0) clarification Fixing http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12165
On the contrary, I've often seen used with to mark up pre-formatted code. If you leave out the tag then you've removed the semantics of the content, plus some source-code highlighting libraries look specifically for tags. If the tag is left out and CSS is used to style code elements as pre-formatted, without CSS classes this interferes with marking up code inline. However, (perhaps tangential to the topic) as far as I know there are no rules to say whether the tags should wrap the tags or vice-versa. Shaun On 2011-09-09 8:09 AM, Ian Hickson wrote: On Fri, 6 May 2011, Simon Pieters wrote: Modified: source === --- source 2011-05-05 22:03:52 UTC (rev 6087) +++ source 2011-05-05 22:45:13 UTC (rev 6088) @@ -105238,7 +105238,6 @@ Use an explicitform andtext field combination instead. listing -xmp Usepre andcode instead. nextid @@ -105256,6 +105255,9 @@ strike Usedel instead if the element is marking an edit, otherwise uses instead. +xmp +Usecode instead, and escape "<" and"&" characters as"<" and"&" respectively. For xmp it should say "Use pre and code ..." since just code is not a drop-in replacement for xmp. Good point. I went with "pre or code". I don't think you'd use both, typically, right?
Re: [whatwg] [html5] r6088 - [e] (0) clarification Fixing http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12165
On Fri, 9 Sep 2011, Simon Pieters wrote: > On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 00:09:39 +0200, Ian Hickson wrote: > > On Fri, 6 May 2011, Simon Pieters wrote: > > > > Modified: source > > > > === > > > > --- source 2011-05-05 22:03:52 UTC (rev 6087) > > > > +++ source 2011-05-05 22:45:13 UTC (rev 6088) > > > > @@ -105238,7 +105238,6 @@ > > > >Use an explicit form and > > > title="attr-input-type-text">text field combination > > > > instead. > > > > listing > > > > - xmp > > > >Use pre and code instead. > > > > nextid > > > > @@ -105256,6 +105255,9 @@ > > > >strike > > > >Use del instead if the element is marking an > > > > edit, > > > > otherwise use s instead. > > > > + xmp > > > > + Use code instead, and escape " > > > title=""><" and "&" characters as > > > > " > > > title=""><" and "&" > > > > respectively. > > > > > > For xmp it should say "Use pre and code ..." since just code is not a > > > drop-in > > > replacement for xmp. > > > > Good point. > > > > I went with "pre or code". I don't think you'd use both, typically, right? > > "To represent a block of computer code, the pre element can be used with a > code element" > > http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/complete/grouping-content.html#the-pre-element > > Plus, you had that recommendation before, and still do for listing: > > > > > listing > > > > - xmp > > > >Use pre and code instead. > > I'd be fine with "use pre instead" for both listing and xmp, though. Sorry, I keep screwing up . I forgot that it was display:block again for some reason. Fixed. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E)\._.,--,'``.fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A/, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Re: [whatwg] [html5] r6088 - [e] (0) clarification Fixing http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12165
On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 00:09:39 +0200, Ian Hickson wrote: On Fri, 6 May 2011, Simon Pieters wrote: > Modified: source > === > --- source 2011-05-05 22:03:52 UTC (rev 6087) > +++ source 2011-05-05 22:45:13 UTC (rev 6088) > @@ -105238,7 +105238,6 @@ >Use an explicit form and > title="attr-input-type-text">text field combination instead. > listing > - xmp >Use pre and code instead. > nextid > @@ -105256,6 +105255,9 @@ >strike >Use del instead if the element is marking an edit, > otherwise use s instead. > + xmp > + Use code instead, and escape "> title=""><" and "&" characters as " > title=""><" and "&" > respectively. For xmp it should say "Use pre and code ..." since just code is not a drop-in replacement for xmp. Good point. I went with "pre or code". I don't think you'd use both, typically, right? "To represent a block of computer code, the pre element can be used with a code element" http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/complete/grouping-content.html#the-pre-element Plus, you had that recommendation before, and still do for listing: > listing > - xmp >Use pre and code instead. I'd be fine with "use pre instead" for both listing and xmp, though. -- Simon Pieters Opera Software
Re: [whatwg] [html5] r6088 - [e] (0) clarification Fixing http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12165
On Fri, 6 May 2011, Simon Pieters wrote: > > Modified: source > > === > > --- source 2011-05-05 22:03:52 UTC (rev 6087) > > +++ source 2011-05-05 22:45:13 UTC (rev 6088) > > @@ -105238,7 +105238,6 @@ > >Use an explicit form and > title="attr-input-type-text">text field combination instead. > > listing > > - xmp > >Use pre and code instead. > > nextid > > @@ -105256,6 +105255,9 @@ > >strike > >Use del instead if the element is marking an edit, > > otherwise use s instead. > > + xmp > > + Use code instead, and escape " > title=""><" and "&" characters as " > title=""><" and "&" > > respectively. > > For xmp it should say "Use pre and code ..." since just code is not a drop-in > replacement for xmp. Good point. I went with "pre or code". I don't think you'd use both, typically, right? -- Ian Hickson U+1047E)\._.,--,'``.fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A/, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Re: [whatwg] [html5] r6088 - [e] (0) clarification Fixing http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12165
On Fri, 06 May 2011 00:45:14 +0200, wrote: Author: ianh Date: 2011-05-05 15:45:13 -0700 (Thu, 05 May 2011) New Revision: 6088 Modified: complete.html index source Log: [e] (0) clarification Fixing http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12165 Modified: source === --- source 2011-05-05 22:03:52 UTC (rev 6087) +++ source 2011-05-05 22:45:13 UTC (rev 6088) @@ -105238,7 +105238,6 @@ Use an explicit form and title="attr-input-type-text">text field combination instead. listing - xmp Use pre and code instead. nextid @@ -105256,6 +105255,9 @@ strike Use del instead if the element is marking an edit, otherwise use s instead. + xmp + Use code instead, and escape "title=""><" and "&" characters as "<" and "&" respectively. For xmp it should say "Use pre and code ..." since just code is not a drop-in replacement for xmp. -- Simon Pieters Opera Software
