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

Re: Implementor feedback on new elements in HTML5

From: Bruce Lawson <brucel@opera.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2009 11:13:18 +0100
To: "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>, "HTMLWG WG" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.uzp9cgvoh8on37@bruce-pc>
On Fri, 04 Sep 2009 09:43:50 +0100, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:

> On Mon, 31 Aug 2009, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>>
>> - Elements requiring changes to <legend> parsing: <figure>, <details>
>>   These elements seem quite useful, but they will be unusable on the  
>> public
>> Web until all browsers are updated to change how they parse <legend>  
>> and the
>> new versions are widely adopted. [snip] We will consider fixing our  
>> parsing of <legend> outside <fieldset>
>> soon, so that we're not the blocker. But it seems like it would be  
>> easier to
>> change the elements that carry the label/caption.
>
> These elements aren't especially critical, so if people would feel like  
> it
> was less of an issue to just not include them in this version, but to
> still fix the parsing of <legend>, and then to introduce them a few  
> yeards
> down the road, once the parsing is fixed, then I'm fine with doing that

Isn't that throwing the baby out with the bathwater? The details element  
is especially useful (I've seen sites pull in the whole jQuery library  
just to make an expanding/ collapsing "details" div) and figure would be  
very welcome to associate image captions with images.

Why not abandon the idea of reusing legend and use <c>, <description> or  
some other such element?

(I'm speaking as a web author rather than a rep of Opera; I have no  
knowledge of our plans r/e parsing of legend)

bruce
Received on Friday, 4 September 2009 10:14:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:07 UTC