W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > April 2010

[Bug 9474] Renaming hgroup to h would be better (like XHTML2), so we can deprecate 'h*' in the future without the "group" sounding strange

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 08:20:47 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1O1xq3-0002Ki-0X@jessica.w3.org>

Ms2ger <Ms2ger@gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
            Summary|'h’ would be better (like |Renaming hgroup to h would
                   |XHTML2), so we can          |be better (like XHTML2), so
                   |deprecate 'h*' in the       |we can deprecate 'h*' in
                   |future without the "group"  |the future without the
                   |sounding strange            |"group" sounding strange

--- Comment #5 from Ms2ger <Ms2ger@gmail.com>  2010-04-14 08:24:42 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> The proposed alternative was this:
>   <h><h1>Heading</h1><h2>Subheading</h2></h>
> Unlike 'h', current 'hgroup' with only text-node children would be awkward,
> because it didn't 'group h*'.
>   <hgroup>Heading</hgroup>
>   <h>Heading</h>

That's the point. The element is meant to 'group h*'. The fact that 'hgroup'
with only text-node children would be awkward, is actually a very good argument
*against* renaming it.

I don't understand why you want to rename it.

Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 14 April 2010 08:24:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 16:30:48 UTC