Welcome to WebHeadStart.org

Web Technologies

Sponsored By

WebHeadStart.org is currently in beta.
Please pardon our appearance as we work to provide you with the most comprehensive reference on today's web technologies.

Interested in advertising on WebHeadStart? Become an advertising partner today!

[WWW-HTML Mailing List Archive Home] [Messages By Thread] [Messages By Date]

RE: l element (was: more xhtml 2.0 comments)

From: Simon Jessey <simon@jessey.net>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 13:41:23 -0400
To: <www-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <LCEKJDDGMJPMMJJAJOMGGEBCCAAA.simon@jessey.net>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-html-request@w3.org [mailto:www-html-request@w3.org]On Behalf
> Of David Woolley
> Subject: Re: l element (was: more xhtml 2.0 comments)
>
>> use <container>...</container> (or some other
>> appropriate word/abbreviation)
>
> I believe the intention is that <l> should not contain any block level
> elements, whereas <div> normally only contains block level elements.

That doesn't make sense to me. Perhaps I have misinterpreted the
specification. Whether an element is block level or inline is a
presentational issue, is it not? If <l> elements are supposed to be inline
elements, then the behavior of <span> is being mimicked, rather than <div>.
So <l>foo</l> is the same as <span>foo</span> in all but name. So perhaps
<span> and <l> should be combined to become <container> instead?

If I've totally misunderstood this, please reply to me off list.

Simon Jessey
w: http://jessey.net/blog/ 
e: simon@jessey.net
Received on Wednesday, 16 April 2003 13:41:36 GMT
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS! Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | WebHeadStart.org © 2005 All Rights Reserved.