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

Re: [Structure Module] Renaming the <html> element to more semantic name

From: <sjoerd@w3future.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 04:29:07 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <3860.217.123.226.234.1131971347.squirrel@217.123.226.234>
To: "www-html@w3.org" <www-html@w3.org>


> Hi,
>
> In the thread on renaming the html element type
> (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2005Nov/0061.html), Sjoerd
> Visscher wrote:
> <blockquote>
> I see only one good reason to change this, and that is to get rid of the
> html/head/body structure. The latest WD makes a big step towards putting
> meta data in the content. This makes it possible to drop the head
> completely.
> </blockquote>
>
> It is not necessary to get rid of the head, just because it is possible to
> do this. Some people may want a clean separation between metadata and
> content, as described in the Head-Body design pattern
> (http://www.xmlpatterns.com/HeadBodyMain.shtml). If there are use cases
> for
> this pattern, why prevent people from using it?

Given the direction XHTML 2 has taken with mixing meta data more with the
content, this argument can go one of two ways: either the head-body design
pattern is a bad one (with which I would agree) or is is a good one. If
the latter, then it should also be possible to use the head-body
separation with other elements. (why prevent people from using it?)

greetings,

Sjoerd Visscher
http://w3future.com/weblog/

PS. In the mean time, let people get used to the idea that xml is not the
ultimate data/document format, as there's clearly a need to have
attributes that can contain structured data, not just strings.
Received on Monday, 14 November 2005 12:29:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:16:04 GMT