W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > September 2009

[whatwg] article/section/details naming/definition problems

From: David Workman <workmad3@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 11:03:32 +0100
Message-ID: <4a60c8650909160303h2c985070ta2a1b922df6a0654@mail.gmail.com>
To throw my views into the mix:
I think 'article' is more suitable than 'post' or 'entry' semantically. A
blog post can reasonably be called an article (although it stretches the
concept a bit for forum posts), whereas in an online newspaper or magazine,
'article' is definitely appropriate whereas 'post' isn't.

A comment element may be useful. Or an optional 'type' attribute on article
that can only take one of several semantically meaningful values to be
valid. Some possibilities would include 'post', 'comment', 'report'. This
would provide semantic meaning, the ability to style them using CSS
selectors, avoids baking a brand new element and doesn't invalidate existing
uses as an <article> tag without a type is still semantically meaningful.

Cheers,

2009/9/16 Keryx Web <webmaster at keryx.se>

> 2009-09-16 03:08, Ian Hickson skrev:
>
>  I'd like to rename<article>, if someone can come up with a better word
>> that means "blog post, blog comment, forum post, or widget". I do think
>> there is an important difference between a subpart of a page that is
>> a potential candidate for syndication, and a subsection of a page that
>> only makes sense with the rest of the page.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>
> Has "entry" been discussed? (Shamelessly stolen from Atom.)
>
>
> --
> Keryx Web (Lars Gunther)
> http://keryx.se/
> http://twitter.com/itpastorn/
> http://itpastorn.blogspot.com/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20090916/10aa2f73/attachment.htm>
Received on Wednesday, 16 September 2009 03:03:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:52 UTC