W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > August 2006

Re: section/heading reformulation

From: <mr.hartung.acc10@streber24.de>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 11:41:57 +0200
Message-ID: <20060804094157.21540@gmx.net>
To: www-html@w3.org

Johannes Koch wrote: 

> I thought, the way to go with XHTML 2 was
> <section>
>    <h>heading of section_1</h>
>    <!--this is section_1-->
>    <section>
>      <h>heading of section_1.1</h>
>      <!--this is section_1.1-->
>    </section>
> </section>

You are partially right and me, I ve been
partially wrong, but both only partially,
so please take a look at the example 
given in the sepcs: 




    <h>Specifying events</h>

        <h>Attaching events to the handler</h>

        <h>Attaching events to the listener</h>

        <h>Specifying the binding elsewhere</h>



Does it mean, that on the "h1-level" the <body>
tag fullfills the <section> job? Seems so.

Maybe it is tought that way, but I think it is
a little bit vague and unprecise, as <body> and 
<section> belong to different modules (document,
structure) with different content model, somehow
different meaning and so on.

As I take consideration in the field of moving 
whole sections between different levels, this 
current solution seems to me to heavily fixed 
on the document and not allowing e.g. the level1
section to be moved to another level (where does
it end? - possibly long before </body>).

(a) So I would prefer a solution with <h> only 
allowed inside a <section> so that you can 
always identify the relationship. In the 
example above, where should an alogrithm know
beginning (o.k. may be in follow-up to the 
heading, but thats loose structure instead of
XML usual nesting) but mainly: the END of the 
h1-section? inside a document there can be 
appendix etc before the <body> tag closes! 

(b) Furthermore I would demand for a restriction
that allows only one <h> per <section>. This
is not forbidden currently. But I consider it 
necessarry to avoid structures like: 

    <h>The heading</h>
    <h>Another heading - but wherefore?</h> 
    <h>And once again.</h>

What do you think thereof?

Yours sincerely,
Mr B S Hartung, Germany, Dresden 
Received on Friday, 4 August 2006 09:42:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:06:13 UTC