[rfc-i] v3: <tindent> feedback

Paul Hoffman paul.hoffman at vpnc.org
Sun Apr 13 12:06:36 PDT 2014


On Apr 13, 2014, at 9:45 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke at gmx.de> wrote:

> On 2014-04-13 18:32, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>> On Apr 13, 2014, at 9:20 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke at gmx.de> wrote:
>> 
>>>>> The content model needs to contain block-level elements (the same is true for <blockquote>, btw).
>>>> 
>>>> How would this make sense from a formatting perspective? In specific, what would expect
>>>> 
>>>> <tindent>
>>>> Here is a sentence.
>>>> <t>
>>>> Here is another sentence.
>>>> </t>
>>>> Here is a third sentence.
>>>> </tindent>
>>>> 
>>>> to render as?
>>> 
>>> It would be invalid.
>> 
>> <t> is a block-level element. You said "The content model needs to contain block-level elements". Can you be more specific about what you meant for the elements that need to be able to be contained?
> 
> Essentially the same things that can be used inside <section>.

<t> is allowed inside of <section>, but above you say <t> inside of <tindent> is invalid.

> 
>>>> Given that <tindent> and <blockquote> mess with the margins, and margins are extremely important visual cues, it seems safer to not let them enclose block-level items whose indentation also give cues.
>>> 
>>> Such as? Example?
>> 
>> I gave an example above. Another would be
>> 
>> <tindent>
>> Here is a sentence.
>> <ul>
>> <li>Here is a bullet item.</li>
>> </ul>
>> Here is another sentence.
>> </tindent>
> 
> Again, that would be invalid.

<ul> is allowed inside of <section>, but here you say that <ul> inside of <tindent> is invalid. 

Your proposal makes no sense to me. Maybe someone else here can state it more understandably.

--Paul Hoffman


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list