W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > September 2012

Re: Extension spec for hgroup (Was: Re: Getting HTML5 to Recommendation in 2014)

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 17:18:17 -0400
Message-ID: <505B8819.6000103@intertwingly.net>
To: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
CC: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, "w3c-wai-pf@w3.org" <w3c-wai-pf@w3.org>, "public-html-a11y@w3.org" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
On 09/20/2012 04:39 PM, Steve Faulkner wrote:
> Hi Sam,
>
>> This may lead to an unusual place: a name that has parsing behavior but is not allowed to be used.  This may be unusual but not unprecedented.
>
> Am I missing something here or are there not quite a few elements and
> attributes [1] that have parsing behaviour but are not allowed to be
> used?
>
> [1] http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/obsolete.html#non-conforming-features

I can parse that question it two different ways.  Forgive me if I chose 
to answer the one that I want. :-)

You are indeed missing something, hgroup does not appear in the following:

http://www.html5accessibility.com/HTML5extensions/HTML5.html#interfaces

So my question to you is: could you live with adding this back in?  If 
not, why not?

My question to everybody else is: would the resulting draft match what 
we would expect if the portions of hgroup that are "at risk" were 
removed?  If not, what else should be added back in?

If we can agree on this, perhaps we can expedite this by asking Steve to 
produce a github pull request (I can talk you through it Steve if 
necessary) and to issue a CfC on this matter.

> regards
> SteveF

- Sam Ruby
Received on Thursday, 20 September 2012 21:18:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 20 September 2012 21:18:53 GMT