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

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

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2013 18:42:51 +0200
To: "Jukka K. Korpela" <jukka.k.korpela@kolumbus.fi>
Cc: porneL <pornel@pornel.net>, public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <20130609184251376802.f15d61aa@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Jukka K. Korpela, Sun, 09 Jun 2013 17:34:36 +0300:

>> Definitely authors want some markup for subheadings, which is why 
>> h1+h2 markup pattern emerged that hgroup t[ri]ed to fix.
> 
> It was similarly a wrong move.

Just a note: Unlike some other participants in this debate, I am not 
fundamentally opposed to hgroup. Frankly, I have trouble explaining 
what the problem with it is. E.g. until AT support is ready, what would 
the trouble bet with do the following? 

<hgroup role=heading aria-level=1>
   <h1 role=presentation>HTML</h1>
   <h2 role=presentation>Living Standard — Last Updated 8 June 2013</h2>
</hgroup>

Also, while the working group has a formal decision to remove hgroup 
from HTML5.0, there is no such formal decision w.r.t. HTML5.1. But this 
is also why I think that we eventually need to come up with something 
better, or else authors will just go for the WHATWg spec in this case.

> Just because some patterns emerge 
> doesn't mean that markup rules need to be changed. On the contrary, 
> if authors can do what they want to do by combining HTML elements in 
> a certain why, why tell them to do things otherwise (like group 
> headings in some containers)?

The answer (AFAICT) is that such combinations have the effect of being 
interpreted by the outline algorithm as representing two sections 
rather than one section. Also, for users, a hgroup is supposed to be 
perceived as a single header, rather than as several. Visually, one 
‘naturally’ groups adjacent headings into a single, subdivided heading. 
But e.g. a screenreader will probably precent them as different 
headings.

> If some authors wish to use headings 
> with some inner markup instead, why tell them they should switch to 
> using some very different pattern?

For the record: To use <subheading> for that inner markup instead of 
the current usage, would not be to switch to "some very different 
pattern". Rather it would be to switch to a similar pattern.
-- 
leif halvard silli
Received on Sunday, 9 June 2013 16:43:21 UTC

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