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

[whatwg] article: do we really need this?

From: Sander Tekelenburg <tekelenb@euronet.nl>
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 08:47:27 +0100
Message-ID: <p06240635c212c57c2eb6@[192.168.0.101]>
At 07:09 +0000 UTC, on 2007-03-06, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote:

[...]

> include a conformance requirement for
> <article> to have a fragment identifier (e.g. for comments) and/or a
> permalink (e.g. for blog posts)? e.g.:
>
> <article> ... <a
> rel="permalink">http://www.example.com/articles/2458</a> .... </article>
>
> or
>
> <article id="article-2458-comment-358686"> ... </article>

FWIW, the WRI lists auto-adding of IDs to 'sections' as something we'd like
authoring systems to do:
<http://webrepair.org/02strategy/02certification/01requirements.php#req20>.We
currently specifically name heading levels, but that should probably be
extended to other elements.

In other words, if HTML would require an ID, it would't make sense to only
require it for <article>.

Btw, browser authors could contribute to adoption of such a practice by
making it easy for users to find such IDs. One implementation might be to,
through the contextual menu, place a link with fragment identifier to that
specific section on the clipboard. I currently make IDs visible through a
user Style Sheet, but you then still need to put the page's URL and fragment
identifier together manually -- a direct means built into the browser would
be more comfortable, especially for all who don't write their own User CSS.


-- 
Sander Tekelenburg
The Web Repair Initiative: <http://webrepair.org/>
Received on Monday, 5 March 2007 23:47:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:33 UTC