- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2010 20:20:38 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8643
Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |NEEDSINFO
--- Comment #1 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> 2010-02-05 20:20:38 ---
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are
satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If
you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please
reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML
Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest
title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue
yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document:
http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html
Status: Did Not Understand Request
Change Description: no spec change
Rationale:
The spec currently says:
# Sections may contain headings of any rank, but authors are
# strongly encouraged to either use only h1 elements, or to use
# elements of the appropriate rank for the section's nesting level.
The spec then goes into excruciating detail as to how UAs (in particular, ATs)
are to handle any set of headings in a coherent fashion, to address this
particular accessibility problem.
Is the above sufficient, or would you like a more explicit condemnation?
If the latter, would it be sufficient to say that within a sectioning root, no
heading element is allowed to be used that is of higher rank than the first
heading element?
--
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 5 February 2010 20:20:39 UTC