Re: Where are Fonts and Phrases allowed? [Was: HTML 2.0 Call for Review ]

Corprew Reed <>
Sender: Corp Reed <>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 94 17:14:17 EDT
From: Corprew Reed <>
Reply-To: Corp Reed <>
X-Organization: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, NY.
X-Logo: <img src="">
X-Homepage: <a href="">here</a>
Subject: Re: Where are Fonts and Phrases allowed? [Was: HTML 2.0 Call for
        Review ]
In-Reply-To: Your message of Fri, 10 Jun 94 16:28:13 EDT
Message-id: <>
Content-Length: 1612
@ 	"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.)

I would like to mention something in favor of this.  There are cases
in relatively common use where nested levels are useful.  For example,

<cite>Molecular Biology of <em>Xenopus Laevis</em></cite>.

This corresponds, I believe, to (3) in Dan's previous letter.  It
could be treated as (4), but treating it as nested gives it greater 
meaning.  If multiple levels of emphasis had to be ignored, it would
cause problems with interpretation of meaning in certain cases.

--Corprew Reed
p.s.  Should I have sent this to Dan instead of the list?
pps.  I like must allow nested myself.  I implemented this with on/off
for multiple invocations of the same tag.  I talked to the editor of
the journals I do the TOCs for, and she said this was current and
acceptable practice.

Randomly selected individuals were given  |  Corprew Reed
software demonstrations to provoke a      |
higher level of threat response.          |
gat d- --d++ c++++(---) l- u++/+ e- m- s+++/+ n-- h++ f+ !g w+++ t+++/--- r++
<a href="">click here</a>