[uf-discuss] Regarding POSH and misuse of the microformats logo

[Keith Alexander]

>
> HTML should be semantic all the time.  There shouldn't be another
> category of HTML that is, and one that isn't.
Ideally perhaps, but as we all know (and this is the reason this 
discussion is taking place), most HTML on the web contains significant 
amounts of presentational markup. Presentational elements are still in 
the html 4 spec. Many tools produce presentational html.
So if you just have tutorials on 'HTML' almost all your target audience 
will think "I already know html", and skip it. But if you talk about 
"Semantic HTML", novices may be curious, and the more expert will 
probably still be interested.

I'm of the opinion that "Semantic HTML" is a perfectly fine term for 
Semantic HTML, and I'm a little sceptical of the utility of a new 
acronym for it. If there's a problem with people still not understanding 
semantic html, either the arguments for it aren't being made clear 
enough and loud enough, or maybe the arguments simply don't chime with  
html authors ' perceptions of what they are doing.