W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January 2010

Re: Alternate proposals for ISSUE-83

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 23:30:06 +0000 (UTC)
To: Bruce Lawson <brucel@opera.com>
Cc: public-html <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1001142328340.17282@ps20323.dreamhostps.com>
On Thu, 14 Jan 2010, Bruce Lawson wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 22:32:09 -0000, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> 
> > If I were forced to chose (e.g. if the chairs said the exact names 
> > were a matter of editorial discretion) then at the moment I would 
> > likely pick <figcaption> for <figure> (with deference to <optgroup>) 
> > and either <dsummary> or <summary> for <details>.
> 
> Out of interest (I don't have an agenda) wouldn't you mint the same 
> element for both purposes (as you did with legend and dd/dt?)

If a suitable element name were found, possibly, though nobody has 
suggested anything suitable for both.

(If we're not reusing an existing element like <legend>, though, there's 
really not much to be gained with having the same element for both 
<details> and <legend>, because it still wouldn't match other similar 
cases in the language.)

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 14 January 2010 23:30:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:57 GMT