W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-comments@w3.org > February 2010

Re: [PHP] HTML5 <aside> description

From: Jochem Maas <jochem@iamjochem.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2010 05:08:25 +0000
Message-ID: <4B7390C9.1050401@iamjochem.com>
To: Robert Cummings <robert@interjinn.com>
CC: public-html-comments@w3.org, PHP General <php-general@lists.php.net>
Op 2/10/10 9:08 PM, Robert Cummings schreef:
> From the editor's draft:
> 
> "
> The aside element represents a section of a page that consists of
> content that is tangentially related to the content around the aside
> element, and which could be considered separate from that content. Such
> sections are often represented as sidebars in printed typography.
> 
> The element can be used for typographical effects like pull quotes or
> sidebars, for advertising, for groups of nav elements, and for other
> content that is considered separate from the main content of the page.
> "
> 
> Dear God, please don't suggest it be used for noise like sidebars,
> advertising, or non related groups of nav elements. Asides are NOT often
> represented AS sidebars in printed typography, they are often
> represented IN sidebars of printed typography. This distinction is
> fundamentally different.
> 
> I've never read a serious article where suddenly an aside is made where
> it says:
> 
>     BUY! BUY! BUY! BUY OUR JUNK TODAY!!
> 
> An aside is tangential to the content (as in the working draft of the
> spec), this means it is related in some way, usually enriching the
> information/experience rather than watering it down with nonsense.
> 
> I beg you to reconsider your wording for this element's description.

as an aside, I think I'll wait until there is some general consensus on the
actual constructive usage of this sort of tag until I use it - personally I
really think this is too vague.

the concepts of what is structural, what is semantic and what is style are too
mixed up and vague for me to worry, just yet, about the details of these new-fangled
HTML5 tags (not mention browser support).

@Rob - your browswer compability 'hack' example in another recent thread is a
perfect example or the problems we face with trying to delineate between styling and
semantics and as such I think I lot of what HTML5 adds is arbitrary and rather
vague (the CANVAS and video stuff not withstanding)

personally I don't give a hoot - browsers (and more importantly the users, and the
various versions they run - and will be running for quite some time) mean that,
as fas as I'm concerned, HTML5 and everything it may entail is still a pipe dream.

As long as people run IE6 or IE7 (actually any POS browser that doesn't properly
attempt to implement current standards) such things as semantically marked up ASIDES
(as vague as the concept might) are rather irrelevant to the day to day business of
building web sites/applications that accessible/relevant/usable/etc to the general
public.

rgds,
Jochem

 PS. from a semantics POV, Robert Cummings is, IMHO, spot on in his assessment - I do enjoy
his posts, he's a sharp cookie with plenty to offer and I always enjoy reading his
argumentation and opinion!
Received on Thursday, 11 February 2010 15:50:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 1 June 2011 00:14:01 GMT