W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2013

Re: Is the current definition of the article element in HTML useful?

From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2013 14:16:27 +0000
Message-ID: <CA+ri+VnZJwDo6qZA5uOFRXHr+Dsw4F-+jRAQyv4_1vT2reSdjw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
Cc: public-html@w3.org
hi chaals,

>Lists are not as clear, because they can be used in comments. Many
comments are more than a single paragraph and a lot of comment systems
allow some >basic structured content:
 yes and an li can contain any flow content[1]

<article>
there is nothing to stop
<article>
being used inside a
<article>comment</artcile>
 is there?<article> articles can be nested.
</article>
<article>and that still leaves us with how to expose set size for a
discrete set of <article>'s </article>

[1] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/dom.html#flow-content-1

regards
Steve

On 1 February 2013 13:29, Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>wrote:

> **
> On Fri, 01 Feb 2013 13:21:48 +0100, Steve Faulkner <
> faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Chaals,
>
> >Yes. Likewise for search engines (and probably other systems that try to
> process web content), people using the article element in this way is
> actually helpful.
>
> can you give us some insight on how it would be more useful for a serach
> engine than using a list to markup comments?
>
> for example:
>
> [...]
>
>
> <article>
>
> <h1> my blog post</h1>
>
> <p> this is my first post </p>
>
> <article>
> <h2> comments</h2>
> <p>This is a comment by <a href="http://my.yandex.ru/chaals
> ">chaals</a>.</p>
> <p>Lists are not as clear, because they can be used in comments. Many
> comments are more than a single paragraph and a lot of comment systems
> allow some basic structured content:</p>
> <ul>
> <li>Inline formatting
> <li>Lists of different types
> <li>some linking, images, etc
> </ul>
> <p>So it is not as simple to figure out where one comment ends and another
> begins as if they were grouped and nested by articles.</p>
> <p>Actually this is like a separate comment that might have come from
> someone else. It's true that we are not going to get really fantastic
> markup all the time. Whatever users can do will be riddled with errors,
> even when we make it clear that doing it right gives good SEO (which for
> most users seems to be an even better motivation than actually allowing
> people to use their content).</p>
> <p>No comment on the implicit social commentary that the last comment
> implies, of course.</p>
> <p>There is some nesting in this set of comments, but using a flat format
> means I would have to shift it to some magic metadata tagging. In the
> public web people seem to think this is less likely to work - and I am
> inclined overall to agree with them. If this were marked up as articles, it
> would be easier to collapse stuff or know when to do so for a user...</p>
> <p>Admittedly lists can be nested too. But there is no indication whether
> a nested list is within a single conceptual lumpofstuff or is a framework
> delineating one lumpofstuff from a different lumpofstaff.</p>
> </article>
> </article>
>
> cheers
>
>
>
> >Skipping the use of article because screenreaders are overly verbose
> might be a short-term hack that breaks a long-term benefit, assuming that
> screenreaders >will improve their handling.
>
> This isn't the only issue btw. Another issue is that the set size is not
> defined/exposed when articles are used where as they are when a list is
> used.
>
> so there is no clear method for AT to know the start and end of the
> comments content when marked up using article alone.
>
> regards
> steveF
>
> On 1 February 2013 11:38, Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 23:02:13 +0100, Kornel LesiƄski <kornel@geekhood.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>  On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 13:06:29 -0000, Bruce Lawson <brucel@opera.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>  Is there a reason for any semanric to describe a comment, though? does
>>>> anyone benefit from
>>>>
>>>> <article>
>>>> <h1>My wonderful Mankini</h1>
>>>> There's only one letter difference between "mankini" and "mankind".
>>>>
>>>> <h2> Two comments</h2>
>>>>
>>>> <article>lol</article>
>>>> <article>u SUK</article>
>>>>
>>>> </article>
>>>>
>>>> over
>>>>
>>>> <article>
>>>> <h1>My wonderful Mankini</h1>
>>>> There's only one letter difference between "mankini" and "mankind".
>>>>
>>>> <h2> Two comments</h2>
>>>>
>>>> <div>lol</div>
>>>> <div>u SUK</div>
>>>>
>>>> </article>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Goal of applications like Readability, Instapaper, Pocket and Reader
>>> mode in Safari is to display content of page's main article without
>>> comments or other distractions.
>>>
>>> Currently these applications use heuristics to achieve that (AFAIK
>>> things like ratio of text to elements, whitelist/blacklist of class names)
>>> and I presume that nested <article> could be a useful input for such
>>> algorithm.
>>>
>>
>> Yes. Likewise for search engines (and probably other systems that try to
>> process web content), people using the article element in this way is
>> actually helpful.
>>
>> Skipping the use of article because screenreaders are overly verbose
>> might be a short-term hack that breaks a long-term benefit, assuming that
>> screenreaders will improve their handling.
>>
>> We already know that they usually take a long time to do things like this
>> (For example header navigation still wasn't in JAWS in 2000 as far as I
>> could tell, despite having been implemented for years in other systems, and
>> now being one of the most critical functions for users).
>>
>> cheers
>>
>> Chaals
>>
>> --
>> Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
>>       chaals@yandex-team.ru         Find more at http://yandex.com
>>
>>
>
>
> <http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
> chaals@yandex-team.ru Find more at http://yandex.com
>



<http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html>
Received on Friday, 1 February 2013 14:17:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 1 February 2013 14:17:38 GMT