Re: [xml2rfc-dev] [Ext] Re: RFC 7991 issue #37: Schema Issue, RFC 7991, In Section 2.12, <br>

[Henrik Levkowetz <[e-mail]>]

Hi Julian,

On 2018-10-04 23:33, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 2018-10-04 21:39, Miek Gieben wrote:
>> [ Quoting <[e-mail]> in "Re: [Ext] Re: [xml2rfc-dev] RFC 
>> 799..." ]
>>> One of the design goals for v3 was to get rid of markup that had no 
>>> semantic meaning to the documents. We mostly succeeded at that, but 
>>> clearly failed to clean up some of it (such as by allowing <br> in 
>>> table cells). I still think this is a good goal, and if we want to be 
>>> consistent, we should just rid of <br>.
>> 
>> If that's technically possible: +1 for removing <br> entirely
> 
> Misleading.
> 
> HTML can focus on semantic markup, because it has a sister technology to 
> deal with presentation (CSS). We don't have that, so we need to consider 
> common cases where a default presentation just isn't good enough.
> 
> I'm very surprised that people have no problem adding an attribute for 
> hanging list presentation but then at the same time object to enforced 
> line breaks in table cells.

For me, it's not that.  It is adding <br> for that case, and not for
others where it would be just as useful.  It's the inconsistency.


Best regards,

	Henrik