Difference between revisions of "Change Proposal for ISSUE-144"
|Line 26:||Line 26:|
Latest revision as of 03:06, 16 June 2011
This is the CCP against ChangeProposals - U Should Be Conforming.
There is no new use cases addressed by the
- All the reasons a human author might have to use
<u>already have more appropriate elements, except the two cases given in the CP. They are both too rare on the Web to be considered valid use cases.
- If we were to address the use case of content generated by an authoring agent, the same argument should be applied to
<center>, align="", etc, yet nobody is making such a case, suggesting that this rationale is not being consistently applied. Inconsistent application of rationales leads to very poor language design, confusing authors ("why is X possible but not the almost identical Y?" is a common question in such cases).
- An underlined text which is not a hyperlink confuses the user in his/her browsing experience.
Authors will have to use appropriate semantic markup for applying underlines. (e.g.
<ins> for insertion,
<em> for emphasis, etc.)