On Sun, 2004-08-29 at 14:27, 'D@7@k|N&' wrote: > Since I have been working on the hardening tute, I've been doing so with > the Docs Guide open, so I have an immediate reference for the tags that > I should be using. I noticed something, that other people may have > noticed, but I don't really understand the point of. The > <guibutton></guibutton>, <guilabel>, <guimenu>, <guimenuitem>, > <application>, and several other tags, all seem to just make the text > bold. Is there a reason that these aren't more defined? (Something > really could would be to id the guimenu buttons, and have the tag insert > the graphic for that button, etc.) Without the more differentiating > characteristics, what is the point of using different tags? The same as the point of any markup language... if a new stylesheet (XSLT?) is developed, you don't have to go back and re-markup all those tags to take advantage of it. Inserting "graphics" for buttons would mean that you have to have a graphic for any button that might come up, and if they change, well, that would be a full-time job just to keep someone on updating them. In a rendering environment where you could (for instance) simply surround a selected group of characters with a gray frame with a black border, the result would look like a key, no? I think this is possible with Web browsers that support HTML 4.0 (i.e. most everything nowadays). I'm not sure what the impact is on text browsing people provided you use a transformation like that; likely minimal. Using an actual graphics character, though, would likely screw those folks up. Always think accessibility! I know for a fact there are several visually-impaired and/or blind persons on some of the fedora lists who are very vocal about problems they have with some a11y features. -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE
