|Keep It Simple, Stupid|
Re: Additions to Approved HTMLby ww (Archbishop)
|on Jun 29, 2015 at 13:05 UTC||Need Help??|
This is to register general agreement with kcotts OP... while acknowledging the general accuracy of the first reply from an AnonyMonk.
That said, I favor making the non-standard elements like <code> tags accept attributes in a manner as close as possible to w3c standards; IOW,
<code uni="1"> and <spoiler title="...">
I, for one, would particularly like to be permit use of color, strike, size, etc. (using a <span class=... or <span style=...) inside code tags to facilitate highlighting (and permit more concise snippets).Yeah, sure, the use of comments to call attention to an error or suggested change works (well "sorta' works") but often only at the expense of extra lines or lines that exceed screen widths of some users.
PM's stated aversion to <br> is something I've never agreed with or understood. Is there some wise monk who'll explain that? (I included it when writing Markup... only because I'd been chastised as a newbie for using break tags.)
Aside: perhaps modification efforts should also be directed to PM's handling of <br /> which Perl Monks Approved HTML tags appears to countenance but which generates an error indication when HTML preview error reporting is set to 4).
Here's an example: =>
A few tags are called non-container tags, because they don't contain any content - they stand alone. Examples are images and line breaks. XHTML requires that all open tags must be closed, even if they're not container tags. Therefore, non-container tags end in />. For example, the tag for a line break is <br />.
Another aside: someone recently suggested (in the CB?) that we'd be well served by automating insertion of code tags around anything that looks like data or code before the preview stage of creating a new post. (Caveat: I have no idea of how to code an implementation nor any intent to try to do so anytime soon!)
IIRC, the bold, big and (sup or sub) tags also sometimes behave oddly when combined. This may be only in special cases and I have not been able to conjure up an illustration right now.