- From: Olivier GENDRIN <olivier.gendrin@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2007 11:35:34 +0200
- To: public-html@w3.org
On 4/5/07, Daniel Schattenkirchner <schattenkirchner.daniel@gmx.de> wrote: > In my opinion the XHTML 2 role-attribute is far superior to the Web > Applications 1.0 predefined class names because the latter got several > disadvantages: > > I don't think they are what most here call backward compatible. > Predefined class names are limited to few elements. I'm using class > names like "copyright" already and, like many other authors, I'm not > only using it on p- and span-elements. It'd be confusing if some > elements with class name X got a different meanign than special elements > with class name X. Also It's unclear how elements with class names that > aren't allowed on that element should be handled. Are they invalid or > ignored. I think that part of the WA-Spec is very imature. (Adding new > class names could be very chaotic very soon). > The same problem is applying to class names that aren't yet predefined, > but may become so in the future. +1 ! We can't constraint now the classes, because we have 'don't break the web' rule. Anyway, if we use role, and if we begin to create a list of predefined roles, we also need to create a rule to define new roles in a short time (less than six month). For example, a new role could be defined if two UA builders, with more than 5% market share ask for it. After a two month RFC delay, the role would be added to the list.
Received on Friday, 6 April 2007 09:35:36 UTC