- From: Dão Gottwald <dao@design-noir.de>
- Date: Mon, 07 May 2007 14:33:41 +0200
- To: Rene Saarsoo <nene@triin.net>
- CC: public-html@w3.org
Rene Saarsoo schrieb: > > Dão Gottwald wrote: >> You write "It's not the copyright class and how it's used, it's the >> principle", and then start with two other special class names. >> >> I agree that "note" and "issue" are too ambiguous. Consequence is that >> they shouldn't be predefined classes, rather than that there should be >> no predefined classes. > > Agreed. > > But the main point I was trying to make is, that the meaning > of any name you choose, more or less depends on the context > it is used. For example I could have a page, that discusses > different search-algorithms. It looks sensible to use class > "search" when referring to different algorithms: > > <span class="search">BubbleSort</span> takes more time > than <span class="search">QuickSort</span>. > > I can also use multiple class names to achieve completely > new meanings: > > <div class="search results"> ... </div> > > Or there could be police website, that lists different > warrants - including search warrants: > > <ul id="warrants"> > <li class="search">Permission to search Joe's apartment.</li> > <li class="kill">Special permission for 007</li> > </ul> > > You could have the same class name at many places in one page, > and it could mean different things depending on the context. > CSS is also context-aware, supporting descendant selectors. > > But with predefined classes the context is stripped off. > Program looking for predefined class says: "I see a class > 'search' there, so there must be a search field." > > (I apologise, that my examples are completely made-up, and this time > only cover one single proposed class name. But you can't say, > that they are wrong, and no-one would do something similar.) All the examples that you gave could be solved by defining 'search' for the form element only, which would be a good enough context. I'm not sure why WA1 defines it for aside, body, p, section and span. >> Authors don't even have to know any of the predefined classes -- they >> can use names that they find useful! The question is whether or not >> some meanings should be exposed to user agents. > > But can I use a predefined class name in some other sense than > the spec defines it, if I find it useful? For other elements, yes. The spec is flawed if it defines a meaning for one particular element where other meanings would make sense. --Dao
Received on Monday, 7 May 2007 12:33:48 UTC