Re: Using <p> elements purely as containers of phrasing elements? Semantic or not?

On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Jukka K. Korpela
<jukka.k.korpela@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
> (snip)
>

Hi Jukka,

Thank you. Now I have more understandings and less confusions about the element.

So, similar to the situation of <article> element, which is not
exclusive for literal articles but can be used on any independent
content, the <p> is not exclusive for literal sentences and paragraphs
but can be used to wrap any text-level content.

In this way, <p> seems to be the better choice than <div> to wrap form
controls and hyperlinks because <p> is dedicated for text-level
content.

Yet I still don't understand the suggestion of using <p> as the
container of a set of legal-related hyperlinks in footer (Privacy
Policy, Terms of Use, Faq, ... etc) when a more appropriate element
can be used, such as <ul>.


Kind Regards,
Ian Yang

Received on Monday, 6 May 2013 15:26:31 UTC