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

Re: 'nl': presentational or semantic?

From: Gabriele Fava <gabriele.fava@tiscalinet.it>
Date: Sun, 08 Sep 2002 21:10:52 +0200
Message-ID: <3D7BA0BC.5070502@tiscalinet.it>
To: www-html@w3.org

Etan Wexler wrote:

>Gabriele Fava wrote to <www-html@w3.org> on 24 August 2002 in "Re: 'nl':
>presentational or semantic?" (<mid:3D67EC52.9000205@tiscalinet.it>):
>
>  
>
>>I fully agree with the proposal of a 
>>construct to divide navigation parts (menus, bars etc.) from the 
>>content, but I can't understand why such navigation parts should be 
>>constructed as lists. I proposed a general navigation element, instead 
>>of that nl.
>>    
>>
>
>I, too, prefer a more general element type that indicates navigation, an
>element type not limited to list semantics.
>
>  
>
>>Perhaps you saw that new navigation list in a w3c specification and 
>>thought that if they put it as a list it must [mean] that for one reason 
>>or another it is good to structure all navigation items of a page as 
>>lists. Think with your own head, I can't see any reason for this.
>>    
>>
>
>My thinking was not along those lines.  You made a specific argument,
>that the 'nl' element type is presentational; I made a specific
>counterargument, that the 'nl' element type is structural and semantic.
>
>  
>
>>Understood why I claimed "nl" to be only a presentational element?
>>    
>>
>
>No, I am sorry to report.
>
>  
>
>>If my guesses are correct, it has just been made
>>to simplify presentational matters.
>>    
>>
>
>I find the motivation irrelevant.  I examine an element type's
>definition to determine whether the type is presentational.
>

Okay, you actually agree with me on the heart of the matter: it would be 
better to replace "nl" with a more general navigation element type. Lets 
leave out the other vain discussions.
Received on Sunday, 8 September 2002 20:34:51 GMT

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