On Sun, Jun 25, 2006 at 04:33:24PM -0600, Chad Perrin wrote:
I've already pointed out that a "does exactly what we want for thirty things, but is named for only one, necessitating the creation of twenty-nine more duplicates on the off-chance we'll change it later" approach can be avoided for ease of differentiation later by separating semantics from presentation, and merely linking the two together. Brion commented with an explanation of what's going on that sounds like it might actually be taking the approach I favored, and only the initial statements' description of what the <poem> tags do created a contrary impression. You seem to think that the behavior assumed in that contrary impression is a better way to do things, however, and somehow have chosen to avoid addressing my statements about the manner in which the same positive effects can be had without the weighty negatives.
Naw, Chad; we're all in violent agreement.
*How* the poem tag does what it does is precisely the way you, I, and everyone else who I've seen post thinks it ought to: by leveraging CSS.
Now, Steve, on the other hand, has raised a good question: what happens when people *do* want the <recipe> tag? :-)
Cheers, -- jra