W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > August 2002

Re: How about a <notice>element?

From: Jonas Jørgensen <jonasj@jonasj.dk>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 10:06:14 +0200
Message-ID: <3D576C76.1090404@jonasj.dk>
To: www-html@w3.org

James Card wrote:

> Jonas Jørgensen wrote:
> 
>>Jonas Jørgensen wrote:
>>>> If there is a <notice> element, why not a <abstract>, <summary>,
>>>> <conclusion>, etc.pp. element? Where to stop?
>>> 
>>> I don't know.
>>
>>I don't see a need for any of the elements you listed, but I think a 
>><warning> element, in addition to <notice>, would be very useful as well.
>>
>><warning>This will permanently delete the file!</warning>
>><notice>The file has been deleted.</notice>
>>
>>Maybe <notice> should be called <info> or similar instead?
> 
> There seems to be two or three major branches of HTML-based 
> "documents". Initially the web consisted primarily of 
> marked-up documents: academic papers, reports
[snip]
> The second major branch comprises "documents" that are 
> primarily presentational in nature. This ranges from 
> graphics-laden pages displaying artwork, to
[snip]

> The third branch I'll describe as the web application 
> "documents". With the addition of forms and scripting the 
> web browser became a platform for building the client 
> interface for various interactive applications. "Documents" 
> don't necessarily have any meaning or content -- they are 
> containers for controls of various sorts. For this type of 
> "document" also, we don't care whether the markup makes any 
> sense or is valid -- we only care that the controls work.

I disagree. I always use valid, sense-making markup even for this type 
of documents.

> (There are often also strong concerns about the 
> presentational "it-has-to-look-good" aspects like the second 
> branch.)
> 
> The <warning> and <notice> elements you propose I would 
> associate with the third group (web application).

Yes.

[snip]
> The <abstract>, <summary>, and <conclusion> elements I would 
> class as being especially helpful in the first branch (reports 
> and research papers). I believe that Bjoern Hoehrmann's point 
> is valid though: at what point do you stop adding extensions 
> to the language?

That's not an easy question. But I still think that warning and notice 
would be useful additions. And I don't really see the advantage of being 
able to mark up abstracts, summaries and conclusions.

/Jonas

-- 
"Your password must be at least 18770 characters and cannot repeat any 
of your previous 30689 passwords. Please type a different password."
- Microsoft Windows 2000 
<http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q276304>
Received on Monday, 12 August 2002 04:06:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:52 GMT