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

Re: itemheader names <h>

From: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 18:21:20 -0400
Message-ID: <7c2a12e20909221521t31a4305jc50de25d8a2b07ed@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: Jim Jewett <jimjjewett@gmail.com>, HTML WG Public List <public-html@w3.org>
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Jim Jewett <jimjjewett@gmail.com> wrote:
>> But as long as we're thinking generic instead of figure-specific,
>> maybe the answer is a simple <h>.  Because of h1-h6, the meaning
>> should be more obvious than it is with most short tags; because of the
>> rejection of <h> to replace h1-h6, it is still available.
>
> I am absolutely certain that you will see <h> rampantly misused to replace <h*>.

That was one of my first thoughts too.  It sounds like a really bad
idea to use it to mean anything other than <h[1-6]>, since that's what
I'd assume it means.  Especially given the "use h1 everywhere" idea
that HTML5 promotes.
Received on Tuesday, 22 September 2009 22:22:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:08 UTC