W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2012

Isn't the word "banner" too presentational and none-semantic?

From: Ian Yang <ian@invigoreight.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 17:50:31 +0800
Message-ID: <CABr1Fsc4bCBZMACQX9Ffm5GZWUA+v7OB2CoJVsvbRj40EhOV5Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Hey all,

How are you today?

There is one thing about ARIA that confused me a lot. It's the naming of
the role "banner".

When using id and class on elements, we were told to prevent using
none-semantic names such as "left-column", "small-box", "right-bar", ...
etc because they contradict the concept "separating presentation from
content".

But look at the word "banner", it is completely a none-semantic name, isn't
it? By naming an element "banner", we are consider its "shape" instead of
its use and meaning. Besides, some people also call advertisement boxes
"banners". So the word "banner" itself isn't really meaningful.

Comparing with the role "contentinfo" which is meaningfully named, why was
the inventor wanted to name the site header "banner" instead of a more
meaningful name like "contenthead" or "masthead"?


Sincerely,
Ian Yang
Meaningful and Semantic HTML lover  |  Front-end developer
Received on Wednesday, 25 July 2012 09:51:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:13:30 UTC