<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 3/22/2021 4:23 PM, Martin J. Dürst
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:a57c6b17-7acc-8087-f1af-d322b879ab7c@it.aoyama.ac.jp">Hello
Asmus, others,
<br>
<br>
On 2021/03/23 04:24, Asmus Freytag via Unicode wrote:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">On 3/22/2021 10:37 AM, Marius Spix via
Unicode wrote:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Dear Christoph,
<br>
according to Mozilla [1],
<br>
"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."
<br>
[1]
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/sup">https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/sup</a>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Now, I have a hard time coming up with examples of "presentation
or appearance"
<br>
purposes that require small, raised letters or digits and are
*not* related to
<br>
some "typographical convention".
<br>
<br>
The problem with <sup> seems to be more in the fact that
there's more than one
<br>
convention that might apply.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
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. <br>
</blockquote>
<p>Right, we get that.</p>
<p>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.</p>
<p>The real issue with <sup> compared to <strong> is
that language like that makes it masquerade as "semantic", when it
isn't. <br>
</p>
<p>A./<br>
</p>
</body>
</html>