W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > August 2011

[Bug 13062] HTML spec should not dictate first/last child nesting level and exact order of child siblings

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 19:07:50 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1QwInm-0007v7-UC@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13062

Marat Tanalin <mtanalin@yandex.ru> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
         Resolution|WONTFIX                     |

--- Comment #23 from Marat Tanalin <mtanalin@yandex.ru> 2011-08-24 19:07:49 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #22)
> Since each case of this has case-specific considerations, please file a
> separate bug for each instance of this pattern that you want changed.

Bad thing is that separate bug-reports will not prevent making similar
impractical spec-level mistakes again and again when inventing new structural
markup for future HTML versions.

For example, if even current "child"-bugs will be fixed, then potential new
markup in future could contain same absurd requirement like "Element A should
be first direct child of element B" again and again. This might lead to
reporting more "case-specific" bugs while keeping actual fundamental issue
still nonresolved.

Purpose of the current bug-report is to prevent ALL such nonsensical
requirements from appearing in the HTML spec forever.

Any element that can be styled at all (unlike, for example, PARAM inside
OBJECT) should never be limited to be first or last child of any element.
Otherwise, it will be inevitably abandoned in real practice in favor of more
flexible (while less semantical) elements. This would be very harmful for
semantics and for HTML itself.

Thanks.

-- 
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 Wednesday, 24 August 2011 19:07:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 16:31:17 UTC