On 12/1/16 6:10 PM, "Paul" <p...@paulwmorris.com> wrote:
>Hi Carl, > >On 12/01/2016 12:44 PM, Carl Sorensen wrote: >> One thing that is note mentioned in your quote is that texinfo separates >> semantics from appearance. It is this precise separation that allows >>one >> to make big but consistent changes in the appearance of the website with >> changes in the CSS. I'm a firm believer in the principle of separating >> semantics from presentation (and we do that with LilyPond, by the way, >> which is one of its strengths IMO). > >I totally agree about the value of separating semantics and appearance. >Using texinfo does enforce that in a strict way, although well-written >HTML also follows this principle. HTML for content and CSS for style. >(E.g. one could just write directly the HTML that is generated from >texinfo.) Maybe I'm missing something or maybe the strict enforcement >is the point? At any rate, my intention is not to engage in argument or >advocate for anything. Yes. In my opinion, strict enforcement is the point. It is possible to separate semantics from presentation in Microsoft Word using styles, but in any writing project involving multiple authors, my experience is that the separation is not maintained. Somebody will mimic formatting without using the style, and that's the end of the semantic marking. I agree that HTML *can* provide the separation, but it doesn't require it. And that's why I agree with the decision not to have the website created directly in HTML. Thanks, Carl _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
