Gregory's Server@aparrish oh my god WHAT
|
7 comments
 @aparrish holy crap! I'm dying laughing over here. Who decided this was the way to go, I want a name  "< u >: The Unarticulated Annotation" Fantastic. I was wondering how they were going to get out of that one, but they came through. @jalefkowit i'm just as susceptible to puritan technical distinctions as the next programmer. but at some point you have to recognize that when you're defining a "semantic" tag in terms of the kind of type that is typically used to express those semantics... you have to admit to yourself that content and presentation are forever inextricably entangled @aparrish It's not even a technical distinction, though. It's just pure woo conjured out of thin air to avoid having to say "we realized later that these things shouldn't be tags at all, but not until after we reimplemented them a few times like idiots" |
@aparrish "Do not confuse the <b> element with the <strong>, <em>, or <mark> elements. The <strong> element represents text of certain importance..."
wow, they really are committed to this particular bit