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

RE: Headings in lists

From: Etan Wexler <ewexler@stickdog.com>
Date: 05 Sep 2002 14:44:44-0700
To: www-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <for-headings-and-captions@d20020904.etan.wexler>

Jelks Cabaniss wrote to <www-html@w3.org> on 24 Aug 2002 in "RE:
Headings in lists" (<mid:000901c24b28$487530d0$6701a8c0@blackie>):

> Several ideas have sprung from the original proposal. [...]
> 
>   1)  Rename the <name> in <nl> to <h>
> 
>   2)  Add <h> to all other list type elements (ul, ol, dl)
> 
>   3)  Replace <h> with <caption>
> 
>   4)  Add <caption> to <object>
> 
> 1 and 2 make sense to me.

I concur.  Regarding Item 1, those who want a 'name' element type should
be the ones to defend their position, as it requires an additional
element type.  Regarding Item 2, the benefits to editing, accessibility,
and information retrieval are straightforward.

> I don't like 3: I don't think the (optional)
> heading should be replaced -- with anything.

Again I concur.

> Tantek has, I think, effectively dismissed #4 -- it can't be done
> because of the fallback mechanism.

I argue otherwise.  The 'object' element type already has one subelement
type, 'param', that is defined to receive special recognition and
treatment that is not within the scope of the fallback mechanism.  Is
mandating such special recognition and treatment for 'caption'
subelements substantially different?  There is no legacy of 'caption'
subelements with which to contend; I just don't see the problem here.

-- 
Etan Wexler <mailto:ewexler@stickdog.com>
Received on Thursday, 5 September 2002 17:28:50 GMT

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