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

Re: Is not better using role="copyright" or <link rel="copyright"> element?

From: Rene Saarsoo <nene@triin.net>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2007 13:19:57 +0300
To: "Diego La Monica" <me@diegolamonica.info>, public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.trycbjl8exn25i@localhost>

Diego La Monica wrote:
> The role has no representation requirement: it's only information. And  
> if we use a new element, in a short (or long) period that element will
> be used for representation purpose. Don't you think?

The proposed elements header, footer, article, section and nav
also don't have any (re)presentational requirements. The existing
address element is usually styled in italic face, but there is
no a requirement or even a clear convention, that contact infor-
mation should be in italic. Browsers could style the <copyright>
element also with italic face - that would be just as arbitrary
as the current styling of <address>.

The only difference I see is, that the above-mentioned elements
are all block-level, but the proposed <copyright> should be allowed
in both block and inline contexts. But that's just a technicality.
Actually I see this requirement to use <address> only where block-
level elements are expected, rather limiting.

--
Rene Saarsoo
Received on Monday, 7 May 2007 10:19:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:15:58 GMT