Error: no declaration found for element 'u'

[Ripplinger]

I'm pretty sure I remember using just <u> and </u> tags for underlined text in the past. But now it seems Sigil will always spit out an error about any 'u' tags used anywhere.

If you turn on HTML Tidy and let it change all underlines, italics, bold, etc. to sgc-# for each page, you no longer get the error. I prefer not using HTML Tidy though since the sgc-# for italics, bold or underline can change for each page, making it more difficult to find if you're making corrections.

Is there no way to use the plain 'u' tag any longer?

[mrmikel]

I found this message from pdurrant:

ePub is based on XHTML 1.1. http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/

The underline <u> tag was deprecated in XHTML 1.0 Transitional, and removed from XHTML 1.0 Strict and XHTML 1.1

Since 1.1 is the declaration at the top of Sigil epubs, it looks like you are out of luck with <u>.

CSS answers though:

http://www.w3schools.com/cssref/pr_t...decoration.asp

It can also be used as a span style as well.

[Ripplinger]

That explains it, thanks for the info.

[jugaor]

I think that you can use the <ins> ... </ins> tags for this task.

[mrmikel]

I think you are right about <ins>, for now. But its purpose is not decorating text, but showing where text has been inserted, as texts of laws which have been revised. So if it works now, it might now work in the future.

[Jellby]

As you say, <ins> is intended for inserted text, the fact that it's usually rendered as underlined by default should not be relied upon. If one wants underlined text, it's better to use <span> with a class, or maybe a styled <em> (emphasized), with or without class, if that's what the underlined text represents:

An <span class="uline">underlined</span> word.
An <em>underlined</em> word.
An <em class="uline">underlined</span> word.

All will look the same if you use these styles:

span.uline { text-decoration: underline }
em { text-decoration: underline; font-style: normal }
em.uline { text-decoration: underline; font-style: normal }

of course, the third is redundant if you also use the second, but it may be useful if you have some emphasized words in italics, for instance, and others underlined.

[mrmikel]

Presumably, though it will offend the technically minded, you could future proof <ins> by listing it in the stylesheet, just as you have defined <em> above.

But if the document were one that needed to be searched, this trick could cause you grief. Things that you meant only to emphasize could be picked up as added phrases when that is not the case.

I can imagine a lover's note where you emphasized the phrases but the machine says they were all an afterthought!