W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > February 2007

[whatwg] W3C compatibility

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 12:04:15 +0100
Message-ID: <op.tnmuddla64w2qv@id-c0020.lan>
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 11:57:09 +0100, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis  
<bhawkeslewis at googlemail.com> wrote:
> [...] but I still can't see there's
> any practical alternative when elements with different semantics share
> the same namespace.)

The practical alternative is to follow the definition that makes most  
sense. And not try to implement both.


> * XHTML2 and "XHTML5" have wildly different ways of indicating document
> structure with headings.

How so?


> * XHTML2 often uses role attributes to indicate semantics/functionality
> where "XHTML5" supplies elements (or uses registered microformats). For
> example, XHTML2 defines a role called "note" as "The content is
> parenthetic or ancillary to the main content of the resource." "XHTML5"
> defines an element <aside/> that "represents a section of a page that
> consists of content that is tangentially related to the content around
> the aside element, and which could be considered separate from that
> content".

XHTML5 also has a semantic class name "note" for this very purpose which  
can be used on <aside>, <p> and <span>.


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Monday, 12 February 2007 03:04:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:32 UTC