- From: Jens Meiert <jens.meiert@erde3.com>
- Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2007 13:33:06 +0200
- To: public-html@w3.org
Andrew Fedoniouk wrote: > footer { position: fixed; top:0; } > > Is it still footer or is it header now? That exactly “made me wonder”. Robert Burns wrote: > My view is that simply changing the names of the elements cannot — > alone — change them into non-presentational elements. More > importantly, I think we need to think about the semantic contents of > these parts of the page more systematically. Agreed, and I didn't intend to “change their names” anyway. It looks like a desirable “semantics update”, too. Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > I disagree that they are presentational. Headers, footers and asides > are identifiable parts of web documents and indeed non-web documents > just as much as paragraphs and sections are. Furthermore, it is hard > to see how they are any more presentational than <tfoot>, <thead>, > <h1> or <th>. Obviously, “thead” and “tfoot” play in the same league, but their existence since HTML 4 is certainly a “bonus” […]. Apart from the already mentioned issues, I begin anticipating scenarios like “aside-itis” (the potential “div-ebola” successor) and endless “header” and “footer” discussions (like “a logo placed in the top-left corner must (not) be placed within `header´” wars). Different element names with adjusted semantics might reduce or prevent that. -- Jens Meiert http://meiert.com/en/
Received on Friday, 7 September 2007 11:33:19 UTC