W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > September 2004

Re: The status on <address>

From: Asbjørn Ulsberg <asbjorn@tigerstaden.no>
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 01:15:26 +0200
To: "Christian Wolfgang Hujer" <Christian.Hujer@itcqis.com>, "Bjoern Hoehrmann" <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Cc: "HTML List" <www-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <opsejpj00buvpchu@quark>

On Thu, 16 Sep 2004 11:21:08 +0200, Christian Wolfgang Hujer  
<Christian.Hujer@itcqis.com> wrote:

> So if you think, <address/> should be replaced by <addr/> and  
> <blockaddr/> or <contact/> and <blockcontact/>, I suggest someone
> else rerises this isuse, don't count so much on me.

I hereby rerise the issue! I think <address> don't accomodate author's  
needs and its current semantics is unintiutive and conflicts with what  
people would want to put into it.

> Talking about the note at [1], I don't quite get the point how the  
> structural difference between a block and an inline element should be
> achieved by a property attribute?

It's not, afaik.

> Imho the issue about <address/> is not how to differ between different  
> kind of addresses, like postal vs. URLs vs. addresses vs. whatsoever.
> The issue is about the document structure: Is the author intending to
> create a block element or an inline element for marking up that
> particular address?

For me, the current <address> element has two problems:

   1. It can't contain block elements (and thus works very bad as a
      document footer wrapper element).

   2. It should contain the document author's contact information, not
      just any kind of contact or address information.

I would like to be able to wrap a general site's footer inside <address>.  
With the current specification text (both in HTML 4, XHTML 1 and XHTML 2)  
I can't do this both because the footer needs to be one line only, and  
because the footer doesn't contain the document author's contact  
information, but general website-administration contact information.

> The example given in
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-xhtml2-20040722/mod-structural.html#sec_8.1.
> again demonstrates a long going issue about <address/>: Is this a block  
> or an inline element?

It is a block element that only allows for inline children. That makes  
sense for the <p> element, but it have never made sense for <address>. At  
least not for me, or any HTML authors I've spoken with.

> Replacing <address/> by <addr/> and <blockaddr/> or <contact/> and
> <blockcontact/> would solve this issue.

Yes, especially if the semantic was expanded to not only allow for the  
document author's contact information, but any contact information related  
to the document or website it resides on.

> Examples for <contact/> and <blockcontact/>

Good examples, all of which I would want to use in my authorings.

> I don't prefer <contact/> and <blockcontact/> over <addr/> and  
> <blockaddr/>, please discuss which pair of elements you find better.

I don't prefer any over the other either; both alternatives would do just  
fine.

-- 
Asbjørn Ulsberg    -=|=-     http://virtuelvis.com/quark/
«He's a loathsome offensive brute, yet I can't look away»
Received on Saturday, 18 September 2004 23:12:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:16:00 GMT