W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > May 2005

Re: separator abuse

From: Johannes Koch <koch@w3development.de>
Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 12:55:13 +0200
Message-ID: <429C4291.4070508@w3development.de>
To: www-html@w3.org

Mikko Rantalainen wrote:

> 
> Johannes Koch wrote:
> 
>> Lachlan Hunt wrote:
>>
>>> http://lachy.id.au/log/2005/05/separator-elements
>>
>>
>> Additionally, the structure of separated perspectives may not fit into 
>> the structure of chapters/sections etc., e.g.
>>
>> <section> ... This is perspective 1 ... This is perspective 2</section>
>> <section>This is still perspective 2 ... This is perspective 1 
>> again</section>
> 
> 
> I'd would mark such structure as
> 
> <section>
> <part class="p1">... This is perspective 1 ...</part>
> <part class="p2"> This is perspective 2</part>
> </section>
> <section>
> <part class="p2">This is still perspective 2 ...</part>
> <part class="p1">This is perspective 1 again</part>
> </section>

This is possible. Another possibility would be

<perspective>
   <part s="1">... This is perspective 1 ...</part>
</perspective>
<perspective>
   <part s="1"> This is perspective 2</part>
   <part s="2">This is still perspective 2 ...</part>
</perspective>
<perspective>
   <part s="2">This is perspective 1 again</part>
</perspective>

That's generally the problem with multi-hierarchical structure. Which 
hierarchy is more important? The ssection-hierarchy or the perspective 
hierarchy?

Another example: music

You have bars with notes. Notes can be connected with beams. They can 
also be connected with slurs. The beam hierarchy competes with the slur 
hierarchy and may also compete with the bar hierarchy.

The HTML WG can say, handling of multi-hierarchical structures is not a 
requirement for XHTML 2.0. If they do, I don't see a need for a separator.

>> Which is just like what I find in my bible. Division into chapters and 
>> verse numbering sometimes look as if done by chance :-) whereas 
>> paragraphs are printed according to the structure of the story. How do 
>> you markup this?
>> <chapter>
>>    <verse>...</verse>
>>    <verse>...</verse>
>>    <verse>...</verse>
>>    <paragraphBreak/>
>>    <verse>...</verse>
>>    <verse>...</verse>
>> </chapter>
>> <chapter>
>>    <verse>...</verse>
>>    <verse>...</verse>
>>    <paragraphBreak/>
>> </chapter>
>> ?
> 
> 
> Logically I see this structure as a poem. So the structure should be
> 
> <section>
>   <p>
>     <l>verse...</l>
>     <l>verse...</l>
>     <l>verse...</l>
>   </p>
>   <p>
>     <l>verse...</l>
>     <l>verse...</l>
>   </p>

No, the paragraph is not finished here but ...

> </section>
> <section>
>   <p>
>     <l>verse...</l>
>     <l>verse...</l>
>   </p>

here.

>   <p>
>     <!-- empty paragraph? -->
>   </p>
> </section>

The first paragraph contains three verses, the second contains 4 verses. 
But within the second paragraph one section end and another starts.
-- 
Johannes Koch
In te domine speravi; non confundar in aeternum.
                             (Te Deum, 4th cent.)
Received on Tuesday, 31 May 2005 10:56:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:19:04 UTC