- From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 08:56:56 +0100
- To: "public-html-comments@w3.org" <public-html-comments@w3.org>, "Andrea Rendine" <master.skywalker.88@gmail.com>
On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 14:15:41 +0100, Andrea Rendine <master.skywalker.88@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all. > I'm a non-pro developer concerned with making standard-compliant and > semantically understandable pages. > I'm going to integrate my web app with a toolbar panel for text > formatting commands. That is, I'm going to require a container for a > series of javascript-powered button-like controls. In a theoretical > world I would certainly use <menu type="toolbar"> (or simply <menu> as > the toolbar state is the missing value default for that case). > Unfortunately this is the real world. So I cannot follow ideals. > In this case my <menu> requires no particular support from UAs. > Nonetheless I'm afraid this could be dismissed from standards, due to > lack of support to its ideal use case (i.e. context menu). So I'd like > to ask to someone more expert: > - how likely is it to see <menu> remain on the spec? It is likely to remain in WHATWG HTML at least, since it has usage on the web. See https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/237#issuecomment-278647404 I created https://github.com/validator/validator/pull/477 to remove the warning from https://checker.html5.org/ et al. > - if this element is not to be used, what is the best (i.e. most > used) semantically-valid way to mark up a toolbar? > Thanks for your advice. Probably <ul>. cheers -- Simon Pieters Opera Software
Received on Monday, 20 March 2017 07:57:34 UTC