W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > September 2009

Re: Implementor feedback (dialog and datepickers)

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2009 20:46:54 -0300
Message-ID: <63df84f0909021646k1e7bb138t67f333efd856a6ea@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lars Gunther <gunther@keryx.se>
Cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 6:21 PM, Lars Gunther<gunther@keryx.se> wrote:
> 2009-09-02 22:57, Lars Gunther skrev:
>>
>> Yes, CSS would be the means to implement the actual voice changes, but
>> we still need semantics to hook into. Without a dedicated element for
>> dialog
>
> Continuing my sentence:
>
> what would the markup actually look like?

You could use:
<section>
<p class="says juliet">O Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou Romeo? Deny
thy father and refuse thy name; Or if thou wilt not, be but sworn my
love and I'll no longer be a Capulet.</p>
<p class="says romeo aside">Shall I hear more, or shall I speak at this?</p>
...
</section>

I certainly agree that <dialog> adds more explicit semantics. However
I see two problems:

1. The current <dialog> element adds support for only the most basic
dialogs. As several have pointed out it's inadequate in many cases.
Such as for irc conversations you'd want to mark up joins and leaves.
For plays you'd want people doing something ("drinks the bottle of
poison") etc, and possibly also scene and act changes.

2. Are dialogs really common enough to warrant their own element? If
we look at the microformat efforts, microformats have been created to
mark up calendar events, peoples contact information, licenses,
reviews, recipes and much more. However no one has taken the time to
create a microformat for dialogs. Based on that it seems more urgent
to add a <recipe> element than adding a <dialog> element.

/ Jonas
Received on Wednesday, 2 September 2009 23:47:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:48 GMT