- From: Smylers <Smylers@stripey.com>
- Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 16:28:48 +0100
- To: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Ben Boyle writes: > On 8/8/07, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> wrote: > > > <address> is not a sectioning element. > > That's good news for HTML; bad news for the spec. The spec reads as if > address elements are sections and definitely requires clarification. Which bit reads like that to you? Contrast, for example, <aside> which is described as: Sectioning block-level element with <address> as: Block-level element That seems unambiguous that the spec doesn't think <address> is sectioning, something re-inforced by the introduction to the Sections section, where the paragraph immediately after the definition of 'sectioning elements' shows that <address> elements are something that appear inside section elements: Some elements are scoped to their nearest ancestor sectioning element. For example, address elements apply just to their section. Is there somewhere else I missed which gives a contradictory impression? > "Sectioning elements" should explicitly state the element names. > http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#sectioning That's a good idea. Smylers
Received on Tuesday, 7 August 2007 15:29:09 UTC