W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html-editor@w3.org > October to December 2006

Re: h1/h2/h3/etc. vs. h

From: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 17:05:26 +0200
To: "Elliotte Harold" <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>, www-html-editor@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.th25jcnqsmjzpq@acer3010.lan>

On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 14:10:35 +0200, Elliotte Harold  
<elharo@metalab.unc.edu> wrote:
> I love the section and h elements in XHTML 2. Over the years, little has  
> been as problematic in HTML for me as deriving sections from the  
> position of the h1/h2/h3 elements. Yes, it can be done; but it's always  
> painful and I frequently need to do it. Having real sections is a big  
> plus.

Absolutely agree.

> Is there any chance that the h1/h2/h3 family could just be removed  
> completely from XHTML 2? I'm not sure they're really necessary any more.  
> For backwards compatibility, there are lots of problematic parts of  
> XHTML 2. Maybe we should just jettison the whole h1/h2/h3 mess, and  
> start over clean?

I personally sympathise with this point of view. However, there has been  
some criticism of XHTML2 for not being sufficiently backwards compatible  
(maybe because the community interested in XHTML is bimodal on this  
issue). While getting rid of h1/h2/h3 would clean up the mess, on the  
other hand they don't actually get in the way of the new approach.

> I know classic HTML isn't going away, but at least we could start clean  
> with XHTML 2.

I hear you. I think for now we have to live with some classic flotsam,  
only use the good stuff, and let the old stuff wither.

Best wishes,

Steven Pemberton
Received on Friday, 27 October 2006 15:05:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:17:55 GMT