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

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

From: Jim Jewett <jimjjewett@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 11:01:50 -0400
Message-ID: <fb6fbf560909230801m6cdb24f7t6fd45ba1b6fc3bbe@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009, Erik Vorhes wrote:

>> <entry> (which has already been proposed) might more logically suit the
>> bill for standalone articles (in a blog or whatever) as well as
>> blog/forum comments. And since it's part of the Atom spec., there's some
>> precedent for defining its use.

> Renaming <article> to <entry> might make sense, I guess. It seems like
> it'd get more abuse, though. It sounds quite generic.

To me, the problem is that it has other meanings.  I would assume it
was for some sort of input.  Others might assume it was for some sort
"good place to start reading", sort of like a fragment ID but clearly
intended for even external links.

Would these be a problem in actual usage?  It probably depends on how
quickly the name catches on with clear examples, so ... maybe.

Received on Wednesday, 23 September 2009 08:01:50 UTC

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