Re: [xml2rfc-dev] [Ext] Re: [xml2rfc] [Rfc-markdown] <br> is back, was: New xml2rfc release: v2.32.0

[Paul Hoffman <[e-mail]>]

On 10/8/19 9:17 AM, Henrik Levkowetz wrote:
>>> Sandy, does the RPC feel that the ability to add a line break is needed?
>>
>> Yes, the RPC would appreciate being able to use <br>.
> 
> 
> Ok, I then propose that we permit <br> in body text, including lists and
> tables, and in document and section titles.  More specifically, I propose to
> permit <br> as a child element of these elements:
> 
>     blockquote
>     dd
>     dt
>     em
>     li
>     name
>     strong
>     t
>     td
>     th
>     title
>     tt
> 
> (Should <sub> and <sup> be in that list?  If we compare with the places where
> for instance <bcp14> is permitted, the answer would be 'yes'; but I'm not
> sure it's the right thing to do.)

This seems to go well beyond what the RPC asked for and significantly muddies the semantics of the v3 format.

The concern of the folks who contributed to the v3 design is that <br> everywhere would have authors thinking that they could put in line breaks for emphasis, or for making the output look "right" without any semantic meaning. In the original HTML semantics, <br> is a block-level break, not a character formatting break.

Given that, I would propose to instead allow <br/> in the following:

blockquote
dd
li
name
t
td
th

(I strongly dislike having <br/> in <name>, but we allow other formatting there, so this should be allowed as well.)

Sandy: Would that suit the needs of the RPC?

--Paul Hoffman