On Fri, Nov 28, 2003 at 09:46:11AM +0100, Andre Poenitz spake thusly: > On Thu, Nov 27, 2003 at 09:52:11PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > > No... underline/underbar is much more releted to size/bold/italic etc. > > It is not a logical style, and that is what I belive charstyles should > > be. > > I would not trust in an eternal existence of different implementations > of 'logical' and 'physical' markup... Even if there is a theoretic > difference I can't see a technical reason requiring two implementations.
However, I think LyX should strive for using logical mark-up only...
if we find that, e.g., someone is underlining text elements, we should
ask *why* he is doing that, i.e., what does he try to express...
semantic mark-up. And then create a logical mark-up style to support
that.
For underline, all I can think of is a typewriter lacking an italic
font... i.e. "typewriter emph". Or (together with blue) a hyperlink.
...and yes, I think (agree?) that character attributes
(size/bold/italic/...) ought to die off... but we cannot just remove
them, as they are in old docs. Discourage their use ("finger
painting") together with providing logical character (and paragraph)
styles to make them unnecessary.
- Martin
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
