- From: Geoffrey Sneddon <gsneddon@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 11:22:25 +0200
- To: John Drinkwater <john@nextraweb.com>
- CC: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
John Drinkwater wrote: > Anne van Kesteren wrote: >> Looking back at the Web Authoring Statistics >> >> http://code.google.com/webstats/2005-12/classes.html >> >> I think the classes that indicated the need for an <article> in fact >> indicate the need for another element. Besides having a header and a >> footer most pages have some kind of element that indicates where the >> main content of the page is. I think that is what the classes "main" >> and "content" indicate. WAI-ARIA has a specific role for this purpose >> as well, "main". Presumably allowing AT to jump directly to the >> content of a page. >> >> If you consider a typical blog or news site you have a header, >> sidebar, footer, and a content area. The content area is not a single >> article, but usually (on the frontpage) consists of the latest ten >> articles or so. It seems perfectly logical to have some kind of >> grouping element for these just like many pages already do. >> >> I think that if you do the study again and also include the values of >> id attributes it will become even more clear, but simply studying >> templates of some blog engines probably does the trick too. >> > > I like this proposal. I take it that the element would be identical to > <section>, but with the clear difference that it *is* a generic > container? I guess the intent is that it provides content for the current section (much like header contains the header for the current section). As such, I would expect it to have no effect on the outlining algorithm (unlike section, which does have an effect). > And with only one content element per document? The same restrictions as header and footer make sense, i.e., none. -- Geoffrey Sneddon — Opera Software <http://gsnedders.com/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Monday, 17 August 2009 09:23:35 UTC