[rfc-i] Is there a use case for 2119 keyword markup?
mellon at fugue.com
Wed Jun 18 16:35:10 PDT 2014
On Jun 18, 2014, at 6:03 PM, Andrew Sullivan <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com> wrote:
> It seems to me that, if we're using semantic mark up and don't use it
> in any way to deal with perhaps the most important semantic
> distinction we have in the entire RFC series, then we're doing it wrong.
The general thrust of your argument is that typography should be normative. I can't agree with this. I understand the impulse, but it's a really huge change, and I see no upside to it at all.
More information about the rfc-interest