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

Re: <subline> becomes <subhead> and other updates

From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2013 18:27:27 +0100
Message-ID: <CA+ri+VmKfrkqGg_zT02qP9RiE89_QnzLU1f1WGkj18C0N7iWyg@mail.gmail.com>
To: contact <contact@thecodeplayground.net>
Cc: "Jukka K. Korpela" <jukka.k.korpela@kolumbus.fi>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Hi Angela,

As an author, I really need subheadings and taglines. All the time. In my
> opinion, if a new element can't do the job with a consensus, could the
> *small* element be redefined so to promote the de-emphazising role?
>

lets find out...

--

Regards

SteveF
HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>


On 8 June 2013 18:23, <contact@thecodeplayground.net> wrote:

> Hi, Steve, Jukka
>
> Maybe the problem, in the first place, comes from the fact that the
> *small* element doesn't have a precise definition. It seems to me that it
> has any strong semantic meaning. "side comments such as small print",
> doesn't mean much to me and I don't believe I ever found myself asking me
> which element to use for caveats or legal restrictions (that are, for most
> of the content, just paragraphs, no?).
>
> In the other hand, I've always struggled to choose the most appropriate
> element for subheadings or taglines.
> The "de-emphazising" side of *small* was implicitly adopted by many web
> authors (and it seems quite natural to me, as I want to believe that
> *small* is not a semantic-less element).
>
> As an author, I really need subheadings and taglines. All the time. In my
> opinion, if a new element can't do the job with a consensus, could the
> *small* element be redefined so to promote the de-emphazising role?
>
> Cheers,
> Angela Ricci
>
> Invited Expert
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From:
> "Steve Faulkner" <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
>
> To:
> "Jukka K. Korpela" <jukka.k.korpela@kolumbus.fi>
> Cc:
> "HTMLWG WG" <public-html@w3.org>
> Sent:
> Sat, 8 Jun 2013 17:48:49 +0100
> Subject:
> Re: <subline> becomes <subhead> and other updates
>
>
>
> Hi Jukka,
>
> >I still wonder what is the problem that such proposals are supposed to
> solve.
>
> I outlined some of the reasons for the proposal here
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2013May/0173.html
>
>  Here is what i think developers want (not necessarily need) anybody
> feel free to add/subtract disagree etc
>
> - A way to indicate part of a heading is differentiated from another
> part as in title/subtitle/alterntive title
>  - A way to indicate that text is not a heading but is closely
> associated with a heading and more specific than a paragraph.
> -  Easy ways to style such content
>
> on top of that the semi-mythical outline algorithm wants /needs a way to
> identify things that isn't heading content that should be included in the
> outline, which is why <hgroup> was foisted upon us.
>
>
> If the problem being solved is authors' question "which markup should I
>> use for...", then I would say that such a problem needs no solution in the
>> form of a new markup element. People have solved such problems over 20
>> years, with whatever HTML elements are available. There is no need for
>> unification, partly because there is no objectively definable, reasonably
>> exact definition for the structure that the new elements are supposed to
>> indicate.
>>
>
> I tend to agree, but am exploring ideas such as <subhead> as i think part
> of my job as an editor of the html spec is to try to make solid authors
> suggestions and see if we can make something useful. Its the same reason I
> have pursued the discussion on small, to stimulate discussion and see if we
> can make progress on it even reach some rough consensus...
>
> I have no great enthusiasm for pushing this proposal any further than it
> currently is (i.e. an unofficial draft) in the process. But if it goes no
> further, but helps make it clearer that such an element is not needed or
> would not be supported by browsers etc, then it serves a useful purpose. It
> may also make us think that perhaps the use of <small> to indicate
> de-emphasised text in general is all we need to indicate some bits of a
> heading are subordinate to others.
>
>  But others may disagree and wish to put further effort into <subhead> or
> some other idea, if so I would support that. (anybody thinking about this
> should read Extension How To http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ExtensionHowTo
> )
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Regards
>
> SteveF
> HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>
>
>
> On 8 June 2013 17:04, Jukka K. Korpela <jukka.k.korpela@kolumbus.fi>wrote:
>
>> 2013-06-08 16:21, Steve Faulkner wrote:
>>
>>> <subline> becomes <subhead> and other updates http://rawgithub.com/w3c/*
>>> *subline/master/index.html<http://rawgithub.com/w3c/subline/master/index.html>
>>> <http**://t.co/xWQE2owXRm <http://t.co/xWQE2owXRm>>
>>>
>>>
>> I still wonder what is the problem that such proposals are supposed to
>> solve.
>>
>> Surely there are often parts of headings that might be classified as
>> "subheads", for example. Or they might seen as parts of headings styled
>> differently. Is there some need to force authors into using one specific
>> markup for them, as opposite to dealing with it with <small> or <span> or
>> whatever? Even if this means that *no* currently used browser supports such
>> markup?
>>
>> If the problem being solved is authors' question "which markup should I
>> use for...", then I would say that such a problem needs no solution in the
>> form of a new markup element. People have solved such problems over 20
>> years, with whatever HTML elements are available. There is no need for
>> unification, partly because there is no objectively definable, reasonably
>> exact definition for the structure that the new elements are supposed to
>> indicate.
>>
>> I would like to draw your attention to the book that has probably the
>> best-known title with "sublines", The Origin of Species:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**File:Origin_of_Species_title_**page.jpg<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Origin_of_Species_title_page.jpg>The book cover has a longish heading presented in four or five different
>> font sizes, divided in a manner that would presumably call not only for
>> <subhead> but also <subsubhead> and <subsubsubhead>, if we think that any
>> part of a heading that *could* be viewed as being structurally different
>> from the rest *must* be marked up with a tag that indicates that.
>>
>> --
>> Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~**jkorpela/<http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/>
>>
>>
>>
>
Received on Saturday, 8 June 2013 17:28:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:38 UTC