- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 28 May 2012 11:36:08 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17158 --- Comment #6 from Fred <eldmannen+w3@gmail.com> 2012-05-28 11:36:07 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #4) > > Admittedly it does break backwards compatibility, I am aware of that, but on > > the other hand it feels cleaner. > > We usually don't trade backwards compatibility for cleanness. > > > Easier to learn because there would be one less tag to learn. > > But one more attribute. Yes, but the attribute would be in the scope of the element, so it would still be easier to learn since you wouldn't unnecessarily meet legend before fieldset. > > > Cleaner DOM because one less element in the DOM. > > OK, I can buy that. > > > An IDE could provide autocompletion/autosuggestion for the legend attribute > > when opening the fieldset tag. > > It could do that with an element as well, as far as I can tell. Such autocompletion would be possible, but would not be as easy to implement, it would be an ugly implementation. > > > No, because now there is no coupling. > > Yes there is. A fieldset's legend is the first legend element that is a child > of the fieldset element, if any. Well the coupling is very loose. It does not feel "right", it feels more like a hack. That's not the way of XML/SGML, its not in its spirit. -- Configure bugmail: https://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 Monday, 28 May 2012 11:36:12 UTC