- From: Jewett, Jim J <jim.jewett@eds.com>
- Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 14:55:08 -0500
- To: "'Patrick Griffiths'" <w3c@htmldog.com>, Stephen Brooks <sb@stephenbrooks.org>, www-html@w3.org
Stephen Brooks: > > ... grid, gr, gd tags, which are used specifically for gridded > > layout. Patrick Griffiths > But surely that, and presentation in general is the job of CSS... Yes ... and not quite. What are <div> and <span> for? They're basically a container of undefined meaning, often (but not always) used just to anchor a style. Compare: <div class=layouttable> <div class=layoutrow> <div class=layoutcell> to <grid> <gr> <gd> Personally, I find the grid version more meaningful, because I won't waste time looking for a connection between the various subelements of a grid or gridrow. (Both are better than a table, which also causes me to worry about lining up columns when I make additions or deletions.) Whether this improvement is worth adding three elements, I'm not sure. I think it would be worth adding at least a single <layout> or <stylehook> that explicitly carries no semantic meaning. (The obvious name, <style> is already in use for inline style of undefined syntax which happens to always be CSS.) In theory, this new element could be <div>, but in practice, <div> is already used for "this is a section, but not important enough to get a header". (And the current draft supports this, suggesting that it does represent a true structural division.) -jJ
Received on Thursday, 4 December 2003 14:55:23 UTC