Aw: Re: HTML entities

[Asmus Freytag (c)]

On 3/22/2021 4:23 PM, Martin J. Dürst wrote:
> Hello Asmus, others,
>
> On 2021/03/23 04:24, Asmus Freytag via Unicode wrote:
>> On 3/22/2021 10:37 AM, Marius Spix via Unicode wrote:
>>> Dear Christoph,
>>> according to Mozilla [1],
>>> "The <sup> element should only be used for typographical 
>>> reasons—that is, to change the position of the text to complywith 
>>> typographical conventions or standards, rather than solely for 
>>> presentation or appearance purposes."
>>> [1] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/sup
>>
>> Now, I have a hard time coming up with examples of "presentation or 
>> appearance"
>> purposes that require small, raised letters or digits and are *not* 
>> related to
>> some "typographical convention".
>>
>> The problem with <sup> seems to be more in the fact that there's more 
>> than one
>> convention that might apply.
>
> I agree that this text from MDN is not very good. I think that what it 
> meant is something like "don't use <sup> if you want smaller, raised 
> letters just for a change or just for fun". Also, of course, MDN is 
> not a specification.

Right, we get that.

In the unusual circumstance that I might want smaller, raised letters 
"just for fun", I may not care about a precise appearance, so I wouldn't 
pay attention to "rules" anyway.

The real issue with <sup> compared to <strong> is that language like 
that makes it masquerade as "semantic", when it isn't.

A./

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://corp.unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20210322/1d9bc10b/attachment.htm>