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

Re: [Bug 7508] <dialog> needs a way to add non-speech related information

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 05:03:39 +0200
Message-ID: <4AA86C8B.8010403@xn--mlform-iua.no>
To: Stephen Stewart <carisenda@gmail.com>
CC: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@målform.no>, public-html@w3.org
Stephen Stewart On 09-09-09 16.05:

> On 9 Sep 2009, at 14:37, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
>> Stephen added:
>>> Some examples of chat on the web can be found at:
>>>
>>> http://projectcerbera.com/!dev/irc-logs/day


I had a look at that page - was quite possible to represent that
chat log as a <dl> list.

       [...]

>>> Mibbit.com similarly uses a <table> but I think one example with   
>>> <table> is enough.
>>
>> Bug 7808 [1] is about making <dialog> work *properly* [...]
> 
> Sorry, I got confused by the summary: "<dialog> needs a way to add non- 
> speech related information" and the current, not set in stone, status  
> of HTML5.


Your examples demonstrates that authors needs to learn how to mark
up dialogs with <dialog>/<dl> - in that way it was very related ...

>> If you think that dialogs are better, more accessible and more  
>> simply  marked up via other means, then that would be another bug  
>> report. I'll only say that I think it is fruitless to say that we  
>> should not have a <dialog> element if you at the same time also want  
>> to advice against using <dl> for dialog. Personally I think we could  
>> continue HTML 4's advice to use <dl> for dialogs, especially if we  
>> add an attribute which informs that it is a dialog - see bug 7509[2].
> 
> I do think that dialogues are more simply and better marked up by  
> other means, 


Such as? (The draft, although not perfect, tells us where to put 
the name and where to put the speech ... There is a recipe and it 
is simple.)

> I also think that since most popular chat mark-up appears  
> not to be using <dl> as encouraged by HTML 4 we should at least  
> consider the alternatives,


There has been a substream of people that have used <dl> always. 
(There would be more if it was simpler to style.)

> or remove it altogether and use what we  
> have in <section> <h> and <p>. I lean toward the latter.


Would you even use a <dl> for a glossary ... ?

Why do you want to use h1-h6 elements? To get an outline/ToC with 
all the postings? Here is an almost real posting from a Norwegian 
online newspaper, with a subject line represented with a <h5>:

<dt>Mr Waffel said, yesterday:</dt><dd>
<h5>RE: Norway won't reach the soccer final</h5>
<p>Yes, we will.</p>
<aside><a>New comment</a> <a>Reply</a> <a>Report</a></aside>
</dd>

>> [1]http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7508
>> [2]http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=750



-- 
leif halvard silli
Received on Thursday, 10 September 2009 03:04:20 GMT

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