- From: Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com>
- Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 23:20:34 -0500
- To: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Jul 17, 2007, at 9:10 PM, Lachlan Hunt wrote: > > The definition of HR in HTML 2.0 was: > > The <HR> element is a divider between sections of text; typically a > full width horizontal rule or equivalent graphic. > > In HTML 3.2, that became: > > Horizontal rules may be used to indicate a change in topic. In a > speech based user agent, the rule could be rendered as a pause. > > In HTML 4.01, that became: > > The HR element causes a horizontal rule to be rendered by visual > user > agents. > > The HTML4 definition is entirely presentational and not at all > useful. HTML5 defines it in a way that is more compatible with its > semantics in HTML 2.0 and 3.2. > > The hr element represents a paragraph-level thematic break, e.g. a > scene change in a story, or a transition to another topic within a > section of a reference book. One other thing I want to add on this issue of <hr>. None of these changes occurred while the recommendation had something called a namespace. The introduction — in XHTML1 — of a namespace was a first. From that point on, the recommendation was making a promise to the community that these names are stable. They will not change in meaning. They may change in content model. That's an open issue, and I imagine that may be another explanation as to why the XHTML2 WG hasn't necessarily settled the namespace issue. It 's only a namespace however. It's not the be all end all of our recommendation (or theirs). If we really think newly introduced elements <small> and <strong> are worth keeping even though they collide with the old elements <strong> and <small> then we can just select a new namespace URI and no harm done. If we'd rather keep the namespace than we can introduce a whole slew of new elements to fulfill this authoring need: <important>, <copyright>, <disadvantage>, etc. In my view the need for these semantics is so minor that it's just not worth it. It's not worth adding new elements (though maybe <copyright> is worthwhile) and it's not worth undermining the XHTML1 namespace. Take care, Rob
Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2007 04:20:45 UTC