[rfc-i] Structure of <li> in v3

Paul Hoffman paul.hoffman at vpnc.org
Sun Feb 16 15:56:33 PST 2014

On Feb 16, 2014, at 3:47 PM, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat at alum.mit.edu> wrote:

>> Those are incomplete. The proposals are:
>> <li hangtext='foo'>bar</li>
>> <li><hangtext>foo</hangtext><therest>bar</therest></li>
> Why not
> <li><hangtext>foo</hangtext><t>bar</t></li>

Yes, of course. Ignore my second one above.

> But yes, that does increast the burden from 9 to 16 characters.
>> For the second, Julian and others expressed a dislike for elements whose content model is both free text and required elements. Thus, the following would not be likely accepted:
>> <li><hangtext>foo</hangtext>bar</li>
> From a usage perspective I find that more appealing.
> I somewhat understand the concern. But at least it is just an optional element at the beginning, which seems less bad than allowing the embedding of stuff in the middle of the text.

It works for me too, but it seems to rankle others (unless I'm misunderstanding the concerns they gave earlier).

--Paul Hoffman

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list