- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 19:04:11 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23490 --- Comment #4 from steve faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> --- (In reply to Jukka K. Korpela from comment #3) > This is a wrong fix to a non-problem. It has no practical impact except that > it may confuse authors. One of the few reasons to use section elements is > that they provide a way to divide a document into thematic parts even when > some or no parts has a heading. Moreover, the characterization “briefly > describes the content of the section” reflects a very one-sided view on the > roles of a heading. > > For example, a novel can be divided into section elements, and they can have > headings, often just numbering headings like “Chapter 1”. There is no reason > to tell people not to use such headings, especially if they are just > converting an existing work into HTML format. And a chapter of a novel could > meaningfully be divided into sections without headings – parts that describe > different courses of events, visually separated e.g. by a blank line. > > Note that the descriptions of h1–h6 do not say that headings describe the > content of sections. They are just, well, headings. This is OK. There are > many kinds of headings, and their nature is a matter of presentation style > and depends on the genre – it’s not adequate to restrict headings to brief > descriptions of content. HI jukka, while i understand your feedback in regards to prescribing what headings are i don't understand "> This is a wrong fix to a non-problem. " why is it a non problem? And why is it wrong to make a soft requirement for the author to provide a heading? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 14 October 2013 19:04:13 UTC