Re: Where are Fonts and Phrases allowed? [Was: HTML 2.0 Call for Review ] "Daniel W. Connolly" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: Where are Fonts and Phrases allowed? [Was: HTML 2.0 Call for Review ]
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 10 Jun 1994 16:04:37 EDT."
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 1994 15:25:18 -0500
From: "Daniel W. Connolly" <email@example.com>
In message <199406102002.NAA02913@rock>, Terry Allen writes:
>I agree it's simpler to say that nesting of font changes has
>no effect, and that this is appropriate to the desired simplicity
>of HTML. But if nesting has no effect, it shouldn't be allowed
>(at the level at which we become proscriptive: 2.0? 2.5? 3.1?),
>or, if the context is current practice, should be deprecated,
>because the writer may make the mistake of believing that if
>he can nest, then nesting must have some effect.
Yes, there is the potential for confusion here.
To clarify: we have several choices:
"Implementations _must_ distinguish nested emphasis"
(my opinion: bad idea. How many levels must they
"Implementations _may_ distinguish nested levels"
(my option: this is the way to go.
We end up with the unfortunate situation where Joe
uses nested emphasis and it works on browser X but not
on browser Y, but given all the various style
configuration mechanisms that are popping up, I don't
see the value in prohibiting this.)
"Implementations _must not_ distinguish nested emphasis"
(this is my 2nd choice.)
I think it's also worth saying something like "while nested emphasis
syntax is allowed, it is deprecated and may not be legal in future
versions of the spec."