W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January to March 2007

Re: Preparing to launch the Forms Task Force ...

From: Laurens Holst <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 04:53:08 +0900
Message-ID: <45FD98A4.5080709@students.cs.uu.nl>
To: James Graham <jg307@cam.ac.uk>
CC: Matthew Raymond <mattraymond@earthlink.net>, Sierk Bornemann <sierkb@gmx.de>, public-html@w3.org
James Graham schreef:
>> What I like about role (or class or whatever) is that the section is 
>> explicit. A section is an important structural document element, and 
>> I shouldn’t have to create rules like 
>> section|nav|header|footer|aside|article to match all different types 
>> of sections, or determine their heading levels, etc. It gets worse 
>> when you add in that you also have to match h1|h2|h3|h4|h5|h6 because 
>> sections may contain headers of any rank. But that only applies to 
>> sections, and not to the other five section types, so apparantly they 
>> are second-rank citizens.
>>
>> That is why I’m very much in favour of <section> and <h>. Retain 
>> <h1>...<h6> for backwards compatibility where necessary. And skip 
>> that whole HUUUGE section on the exact semantics of implicit sections 
>> with the latter. Which is of course pretty much what XHTML2 did.
>
> That really doesn't work. You can't just ignore the problem of 
> defining how any new heading model works with the old heading model* 
> (or you can but you end up with a crappy spec that can't be 
> implemented interoperably). If you're looking to understand why the 
> WHATWG heading model looks the way it does the main threads (IIRC) in 
> which the model was developed are [1] and [2]. 

My point of view is that <h1>...<h6> do not imply any kind of sectioning 
at all, they only specify headings, and the section that follows is 
implicit. The WHATWG complicates matters by pretending that they do, and 
dedicating a huge section to it too.

However, I don’t see how it can do this, as text from a level-1 section 
that continues after a level-2 section will be classified incorrectly to 
be in the level-2 section. Instead of just not being classified into 
sections at all, *because the original document did not provide that 
information*!

And even if you would want to specify it. I mean, it’s *really* obvious. 
“Each heading starts a new section according to their level, which lasts 
until the next heading or the end of the document”. There, put that 
phrase in the spec instead of that whole chapter. There is no need to be 
overly meticulous about it, like WHATWG spec section 3.8.11.1. “Creating 
an outline”.


~Grauw

-- 
Ushiko-san! Kimi wa doushite, Ushiko-san nan da!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Laurens Holst, student, university of Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Website: www.grauw.nl. Backbase employee; www.backbase.com.




Received on Sunday, 18 March 2007 19:53:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 18 March 2007 19:53:43 GMT