Re: extracting semantics Re: Namespace

Le 18 juil. 2007 à 19:09, Ben Boyle a écrit :
> I think the burden of proof should be flipped here. If HTML5 changes
> the semantics of an element, any element, that had better be
> justified.

Indeed, or more exactly, refining the meaning of an element have to  
be done in a very careful way.
For example, because we were talking about small element. Something  
that would make a bit more sense to me would be

What type of information I could see HTML 5.01

   Definition: The small element renders the text in a smaller font  
than its environment.

   Browsers: They should support it by rendering with a font smaller  
than the …

   Authoring tools: They should not support this presentational  
elements. If the use of small is done in the intent of carrying  
meaningful semantics, the author should use an appropriate class name  
or a dedicated element for it.


	<a href="">Creative  
Commons 2.0</a>

      <html profile="@@">
      <p class="copyright">
	<a href=""  
rel="license">cc by 2.0</a>

   Trivia: "small" elements has been used to represent sometimes  
"small print" (part of a document often describing legal  
restrictions, such as copyrights or other disadvantages), or other  
side comments.


   Here there is a need of statistics. From my [quick checking][1] on  
some high traffic japanese websites, it has been used only 1 on 8 on  
the home page. (which is not a serious survey, just to give an idea.)
   - How many small elements are really used for "small print" or  
"side comments"?
   - What is the most common way of declaring copyright information?

   About extracting semantics
   * Semantic Data Extractor
   * LogValidator (has been also conceived for this kind of things)
   * Yahoo Search
   * Google Search


Karl Dubost -
W3C Conformance Manager, QA Activity Lead
   QA Weblog -
      *** Be Strict To Be Cool ***

Received on Thursday, 19 July 2007 00:30:52 UTC