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

[Bug 13240] Consider replacing <time> with <data>

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 15:48:18 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1Qhkck-0000dI-FL@jessica.w3.org>

Gordon Brander <me@gordonbrander.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
                 CC|                            |me@gordonbrander.com

--- Comment #6 from Gordon Brander <me@gordonbrander.com> 2011-07-15 15:48:17 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> I think that changing it to <data> could make it too generic.

As a publisher (front-end developer who builds sites for large companies) I
would like to second Ian. Prior to HTML5, we were using hAtom to mark up
articles and blog posts. When we were using hAtom, I heard frequent questions
from other developers here regarding the way dates were marked up. The abbr,
title and value-title patterns were confusing to developers that hadn't read
the spec.

We have not had that problem with <article> + <time>. When training devs here
on HTML5, folks immediately "got" what <time> was for. Also, having datetime be
validate-able has meant it gets fixed if it's not properly formatted.

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, 15 July 2011 15:48:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:01:55 UTC