W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > February 2008

[whatwg] HTML 5 vs. XHTML 2.0

From: James Graham <jg307@cam.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 09:42:35 +0000
Message-ID: <47B16A0B.50804@cam.ac.uk>
Brian Smith wrote:
> Ian Hickson wrote:
>   
>> On Sat, 13 Nov 2004, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>>     
>>> Anyway, I do think it's a problem for styling, automatic content 
>>> extraction and non-CSS presentation that HTML lacks the markup for 
>>> indicating which parts of the page are content proper and which are 
>>> navigation and other chrome. Therefore, a footer element 
>>>       
>> for isolating 
>>     
>>> navigation and legal stuff from content would make sense. (Already 
>>> suggested in 
>>>
>>>       
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2002Aug/0229.html at the 
>>     
>>> end of the message.)
>>>       
>> I hope the <nav>, <footer>, and <article> elements help this case.
>>     
>
> How should advertisements be marked up?
>   
It's worth considering that an <advert> element (or <banner> or whatever 
you decide to call it) would just cause style rules like advert 
{display:none;} to  become widespread (e.g. by integration into Adblock 
and equivalent). Therefore I can't see this type of markup being used by 
most advertisers.
Received on Tuesday, 12 February 2008 01:42:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:39 UTC