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

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

From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 13:35:28 +0000
Message-ID: <CA+ri+V=5K8bHNwiTR_KBBb2PrAi_goKWrieXKPhahUBhhdn6iA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bruce Lawson <brucel@opera.com>
Cc: public-html@w3.org, Léonie Watson <tink@tink.co.uk>
another question is whether using a list would be useful/helpful? Leonie?

as  a list provides a set size and ability to skip over it or drill
into nested lists if present etc. Or are list semantics too verbose?

<h2> Two comments</h2>
<ol>
<li>lol
<li>u SUK
</ol>

regards
SteveF

On 23 January 2013 13:06, Bruce Lawson <brucel@opera.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 12:52:43 -0000, Léonie Watson <tink@tink.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>
>> When article elements are nested, the inner article elements represent
>> self-contained compositions that are related to the contents of the outer
>> article. For instance a website that features book reviews could represent
>> an image of a book cover and its cover text as an article, nested within
>> the
>> article element for the book review.
>
>
> 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>
>
> ?
>
Received on Wednesday, 23 January 2013 13:36:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 23 January 2013 13:36:36 GMT