11915 2011-01-29 05:06:13 +0000 Suggestion: Instead of forbidding and inventing you could as well redefine to be what is intended for -- roughly the same idea as for and . Clearly not all old HTML4 / / match what the new HTML5 / / 2011-08-04 05:04:39 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified HTML WG LC1 HTML5 spec unspecified Other other RESOLVED WONTFIX http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#top P3 normal --- 1 contributor ian ian mike public-html-admin public-html-wg-issue-tracking webmaster public-html-bugzilla oldest_to_newest 44873 0 contributor 2011-01-29 05:06:13 +0000 Specification: http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html Section: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#top Comment: Suggestion: Instead of forbidding and inventing you could as well redefine to be what is intended for -- roughly the same idea as for and . Clearly not all old HTML4 / / match what the new HTML5 / / will be, but as this is no serious problem for and it should be also no serious problem for . There are many appplications offering I + B + U, e.g., forum software and simple "HTML" input in comment forms. For some use cases would require 13 keystrokes, where only needs 7. Personally I'm no fan of the old and would not miss it, but you could specify a good new instead of . - Frank <mailto:hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com> Posted from: 82.113.121.49 44897 1 webmaster 2011-01-30 18:44:50 +0000 There is a huge diffeence between and and that is default styling. Underlined text that is not a link is a big usability problem. As a teacher this proposal will be burdensome. Yes, used to mean underline but now it means "mark", but in order to use it without deteriorating usability you MUST remove that styling. Thus, you have an element that sounds like it underlines, but should not use it for that. And it will validate, not giving authors a chance to catch bad usage, i.e. when it IS being used for the underline effect, that should be done in CSS. The web teacher in me cries NO, when I read this proposal. 45850 2 ian 2011-02-19 00:18:43 +0000 EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Rejected Change Description: no spec change Rationale: We considered this, actually. The main reason we didn't do it is that we're hoping browsers will introduce behaviour for such as highlighting the scrollbar, and it's not realistic to do that with . 52836 3 mike 2011-08-04 05:04:39 +0000 mass-moved component to LC1