<small> (Design/Themes)
Hi,
just a little hint - there is a HTML Tag <small> that's even valid in strict. (I just found lots of "<span class="small">" in the default template...)
Best
Arnd
BBCode [size]
by Alfie 
, Vienna, Austria, Saturday, April 11, 2009, 01:35 (5495 days ago) @ Arnd
Hi Arnd!
just a little hint - there is a HTML Tag <small> that's even valid in strict.
Sure. And there's already a BBCode for it (and an other one for large text). Example:
NORMAL SMALL [color=#00f]LARGE[/color]
Syntax:
[size=small]foo[/size]
[size=large]bar[/size]
For a list of BBCodes see this post.
--
Cheers,
Alfie (Helmut Schütz)
BEBA-Forum (v1.8β)
<small> vs. <span class="small">
by Alex , Saturday, April 11, 2009, 09:00 (5495 days ago) @ Alfie
Hi Alfie,
there is a HTML Tag <small> that's even valid in strict.
Sure. And there's already a BBCode for it
As I understood Arnd he wasn't referring to the BBCodes but to the markup in general. And he's probably right that <small> is better than <span class="small">. What I'm just wondering: isn't <small> a non-semantic tag like <b> and <i>?
Alex
<small> vs. <span class="small">
Hello
What I'm just wondering: isn't
<small>a non-semantic tag like<b>and<i>?
Yes it is.
Tschö, Auge
deprecated elements in (X)HTML strict
by Alfie , Vienna, Austria, Wednesday, April 15, 2009, 00:11 (5491 days ago) @ Auge
Hello Auge & Arnd!
What I'm just wondering: isn't
<small>a non-semantic tag like<b>and<i>?
Yes it is.
No it isn't. 
(SCNR)
OK, to be serious, it depends on the context (do we assume that CSS is available or not). <u>, <strike>, and <s> are deprecated since HTML 4.01 strict.
The separation of content [(X)HTML)] and layout (CSS) is a wonderful thing, but mainly for the developer of the website. In most cases results of
<p><u>foo</u></p>
and
<p><span class="underline">foo</span></p>
plus
.underline { text-decoration:underline; }
or even worse
.underline { border-bottom:thin solid black; }
will look very similar at the client, but the HTML is simply larger.
A nice historical overview by Tim Tepaße at Jeena's Blog is based on his post in the SELFHTML-Forum in 2005. Great to read (sorry folks, German only).
--
Cheers,
Alfie (Helmut Schütz)
BEBA-Forum (v1.8β)
deprecated elements in (X)HTML strict
Hello
What I'm just wondering: isn't
<small>a non-semantic tag like<b>and<i>?
Yes it is.
No it isn't.
Ohh doch: Yes it is.
The continuance of these elements in the standards may be reasonable, but their non semanticness stays as a fact.
In most cases results of [some code] will look very similar at the client, but the HTML is simply larger.
The separation between structure (HTML) and layout (CSS) may cause a larger source code (HTML and CSS) in consequence, but both codes are maintanable in a better way.
A nice historical overview by Tim Tepaße at Jeena's Blog is based on his post in the SELFHTML-Forum in 2005. Great to read (sorry folks, German only).
truly nice 
... but what does he say? he spokes about the history (HTML 2, 3.2, 4, XHTML 1) and about a overhauled future (XHTML 1.1, XHTML 2 vs. HTML 5). This future is not only overhauled, it is far far away from a satisfying implementation in the browsers (something similar with CSS 3, but that's another story).
Tschö, Auge