W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2007

Re: 3.8.10. The address element

From: Smylers <Smylers@stripey.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 16:28:48 +0100
To: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20070807152848.GB5960@stripey.com>

Ben Boyle writes:

> On 8/8/07, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> wrote:
> > <address> is not a sectioning element.
> That's good news for HTML; bad news for the spec. The spec reads as if
> address elements are sections and definitely requires clarification.

Which bit reads like that to you?  Contrast, for example, <aside> which
is described as:

  Sectioning block-level element

with <address> as:

  Block-level element

That seems unambiguous that the spec doesn't think <address> is
sectioning, something re-inforced by the introduction to the Sections
section, where the paragraph immediately after the definition of
'sectioning elements' shows that <address> elements are something that
appear inside section elements:

  Some elements are scoped to their nearest ancestor sectioning element.
  For example, address elements apply just to their section.

Is there somewhere else I missed which gives a contradictory impression?

> "Sectioning elements" should explicitly state the element names.
> http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#sectioning

That's a good idea.

Received on Tuesday, 7 August 2007 15:29:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:25 UTC