- From: Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>
- Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 13:37:15 +0000
- To: James Graham <jg307@cam.ac.uk>
- CC: Terry Morris <lsnbluff@gmail.com>, Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>, Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
> Does this answer your questions, Josh?
Thanks for that James.
It therefore makes *far* more sense (on several levels) in the HTML 5
Authoring Guidelines Proposal <section> example to use:
<body>
<h1>Top Level Heading</h1>
<section>
<h2>Second Level Heading</h2>
<section>
<h3>Third Level Heading</h3>
</section>
</section>
</body>
instead of
<body>
<h1>Top Level Heading</h1>
<section>
<h1>Second Level Heading</h1>
<section>
<h1>Third Level Heading</h1>
</section>
</section>
</body>
Also, In order for the sections to be discoverable by AT there will have
to be some algorithm that is triggered in the UA to inform a screen
reader user that " This <h1> section has other parts". I thought this
was naturally inferred by a structured document? The thing is I don't
really see any extra benefit from this element. As you say its not
entirely semantically neutral, as per the definition in the spec, but in
many ways it is. For example, in a parallel universe we could be using a
<section> element rather like a <div>, in fact it would be perfect and
maybe even easier for authors to understand also!
Josh
Received on Tuesday, 27 November 2007 13:37:34 UTC