[rfc-i] <tt> vs HTML5
paul.hoffman at vpnc.org (Paul Hoffman) Sat, 20 February 2016 16:29 UTC
From: paul.hoffman at vpnc.org (Paul Hoffman)
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:29:43 -0800
Subject: [rfc-i] <tt> vs HTML5
In-Reply-To: <56C84484.2000902@gmx.de>
References: <56C84484.2000902@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <DE3016C2-86EA-4019-9D00-DF585DFB90D4@vpnc.org>
On 20 Feb 2016, at 2:48, Julian Reschke wrote: > <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-iab-html-rfc-02#section-9.63>: > >> 9.63. <tt> >> >> This element is directly rendered as its HTML counterpart. > > but > <https://www.w3.org/TR/html5/obsolete.html#non-conforming-features>: > > So that's a requirement to produce invalid HTML... We could easily fix this by getting rid of <tt> in the XML and replace it with <kbd>. Given that <tt> isn't in the v2 grammar, this change seems easy. For historical reference, the design team discussed this back in October 2014 but didn't come to consensus and then kinda forgot about it. At the time, we were leaning against any presentational elements like <strong> and <em>, so we dropped the subject, but then later heard enough input to add <strong> and <em> but we forgot to revisit the fact that <tt> is deprecated in HTML 5. --Paul Hoffman
- [rfc-i] <tt> vs HTML5 Julian Reschke
- [rfc-i] <tt> vs HTML5 Carsten Bormann
- [rfc-i] <tt> vs HTML5 Riccardo Bernardini
- [rfc-i] <tt> vs HTML5 Paul Hoffman
- [rfc-i] <tt> vs HTML5 Julian Reschke
- [rfc-i] <tt> vs HTML5 Paul Hoffman
- [rfc-i] <tt> vs HTML5 Carsten Bormann
- [rfc-i] <tt> vs HTML5 Julian Reschke
- [rfc-i] <tt> vs HTML5 Paul Hoffman
- [rfc-i] <tt> vs HTML5 Julian Reschke
- [rfc-i] <tt> vs HTML5 Brian E Carpenter
- [rfc-i] <tt> vs HTML5 Joe Hildebrand jhildebr
- [rfc-i] <tt> vs HTML5 Paul Hoffman
- [rfc-i] <tt> vs HTML5 Julian Reschke