Franz skrev 11. okt. 2011 10:58: > Hi, > > as I extended the CKEditorPlugin for Trac, I found that Trac formats > underlined text by this line of code: > <span class="underline"> As far as I understand this is defined in > http://trac.edgewall.org/browser//trunk/trac/wiki/formatter.py#L409 > > CKEditor uses the u-tag for underlined text, so there is a difference, > which has to be handled. > > But why are you using the span-tag, when there is a u-tag? Isn't the u- > tag the official / nicer solution?
I can't answer for the decision by the trac-team to use the span tag -- but in general there are two approaches to html -- the "old" one and the "new" semantic model. In general tags like <b> (bold) and <u> (underline) have been phased out in favour of semantic tags like <em> (emphasis) and <strong>. This is a "write what you mean, not what it might look like" approach. This separation between semantics and style is part of the design behind css. One might argue that using a span is the worst of both worlds -- but at least the span tag is intended for adding among other thing visual style to a document without complicating the document structure. There are two reasons for this; a) making the html document more easily machine readable, and b) because of a) makking the html document easier to render "with it's intended meaning" by a user-agent for a user. Eg: In Japanese, there is no meaningful "underline", and emphasis is often made by using a different script (katakana) (Not that I know of any browser that renders <em> as katakana -- but it would be possible in theory). Similarly a screen reader might try to emphasise a word verbally -- rather than reading "underline, word, underline stop" or something similar. So, no. the "u"-tag isn't necessarily a better/more official approach. Best regards, -- .---. Eirik Schwenke <[email protected]> ( NSD ) Harald Hårfagresgate 29 Rom 150 '---' N-5007 Bergen tlf: (555) 889 13 GPG-key at pgp.mit.edu Id 0x8AA3392C
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
