Re: proposal: clarification of nav element

For me one of the main issues is what does "major navigation blocks" mean,
so something along the lines of what you (Bruce) suggested would be useful,
but perhaps expanded more.

But of course it is never as easy as that as sometimes the "major
navigation" on a page might be links to elsewhere, using one of your
examples, a page with a title of "Other Reading" might only contain links
to "other reading" - should these links then be within a <nav> as they are
the "majjor navigation" for this page, potentially.

On 4 February 2013 13:24, Bruce Lawson <brucel@opera.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 04 Feb 2013 11:48:23 -0000, Steve Faulkner <
> faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  Judging from comments on a recent blog post [1] there appears to be some
>> confusion in the developer community about nav element semantics and what
>> it does as implemented.
>>
>> I propose that an explanatory note be added to the current definition text
>> to make it clear that <nav> does not equal a list
>> of navigation linksand that if a list of link is what is required then use
>> a list.
>>
>
> It seems already to say that:
>
> "The nav element represents a section of a page that links to other pages
> or to parts within the page: a section with navigation links.
>
> Note: Not all groups of links on a page need to be in a nav element — the
> element is primarily intended for sections that consist of major navigation
> blocks. "
>
> Or do you means something like "A list of links that are not navigation
> around the site or page - for example, a list of sponsored links, a list of
> "other reading" or allied sites, should not be <nav>" ?
>
>
> Bruce Lawson
> Open standards evangelist
> Developer Relations Team
> Opera
>
> http://dev.opera.com
>
>


-- 
ian devlin
e: ian@iandevlin.com
w: www.iandevlin.com
t: @iandevlin <http://www.twitter.com/iandevlin>
skype: idevlin

buy my book: html5 multimedia: develop and design<http://html5multimedia.com>