- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2013 14:18:29 +0100
- To: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Steve, the blog post says that to blind users, it is often better if list elements are not used as navigation link containers. If that is a real issue, and *that* is the message you want to send, then, explaining (in some other part of the spec) about <ul role="presentation">, seems just as relevant, since I doubt that authors are going to stop using lists for navigation. Speaking personally, then for a while I thought that <nav> was a list container (similar to <ul>, <ol> and <menu>) - I probably somehow mixed it up with <menu>. But I have never thought that <nav> was "list container container". Leif Steve Faulkner, Mon, 4 Feb 2013 13:09:54 +0000: > BTW > > it may be after discussion that it is decided that no changes to the spec > are needed as the spec is clear as it can be. > > regards > Steve > > On 4 February 2013 11:48, 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. >> >> thoughts? >> >> [1] http://css-tricks.com/navigation-in-lists-to-be-or-not-to-be/ >> >> -- >> with regards >> >> Steve Faulkner >> >>
Received on Monday, 4 February 2013 13:18:57 UTC