- From: Ben Millard <cerbera@projectcerbera.com>
- Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 19:01:46 -0000
- To: "Lachlan Hunt" <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- Cc: "Bruce Lawson" <brucel@opera.com>, "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>
Lachlan Hunt wrote: > Ben Millard wrote: >> When I've have stumbled across pages with legalese, they didn't use >> <small>. > > Or this example based on Google: > > <p><small>©2009 - <a > href="/intl/en/privacy.html">Privacy</a></small></p> > (Note: Google actually uses <font size="-2"> in place of <small>) It also uses <font size=-2> for a list of links: * <http://www.google.com/> Nosing around a few other footers from that site, I found: 1. <p>: <http://www.google.com/intl/en/about.html> 2. <div id>: <http://www.google.com/intl/en/contact/> 3. <td align><font size=-1 color>: <http://www.google.com/support/press/bin/request.py?contact_type=speakers_bureau> 4. <p>: <http://www.google.co.uk/support/jobs/bin/topic.py?dep_id=1054&loc_id=1113&topic=1113> 5. <p>: <http://www.google.com/intl/en_uk/mobile/> 6. <div class><small>: <http://www.google.com/accounts/TOS?loc=GB> 3 and 5 use a visibly smaller text size. Surprisingly, 6 has normal-sized footer text, even though it's definitely using <small>: [[[ <div class=footer><small>©2008 Google - <a href="http://www.google.co.uk">Home</a> - <a href="http://www.google.co.uk/about.html">About Google</a> - <a href="http://www.google.co.uk/privacy.html">Privacy Policy</a> - <a href="TOS?hl=en">Terms of Service</a> </small></div> ]]] It's due to the stylesheet starting with this: [[[ h1 td, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, div.topnav, div.sidenav, div.sidesearch, div.sidequote, div.bottomnav, div.footer, small, td#sidebartitle { font-family: arial,sans-serif; } ]]] The <small> in 6 includes the copyright notice along with 5 navigation and utility links after it in the <small>. These links are neither copyright nor side comments. So the one instance I found where <small> contained the right type of content, it contained more content of the wrong type. At this stage, I'm feeling more confident that the semantics for <small> are at odds with real content. (Studying more pages would be more accurate, though.) If I'm understanding the spec correctly: <http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/text-level-semantics.html#the-small-element> To rewrite the footer in 6 with the <small> element as HTML5 defines it (along with making the semantics of footer as a whole more precise): [[[ <footer> <p><small>©2008 Google</small></p> <ul> <li><a href="/">Home</a></li> <li><a href="/about.html">About Google</a></li> <li><a href="/privacy.html">Privacy Policy</a></li> <li><a href="TOS?hl=en">Terms of Service</a></li> </ul> </footer> ]]] Is that about right? With some CSS based on this it could look the same as the current page: [[[ footer { color: #6f6f6f; } footer p, footer ul, footer li { display: inline; margin: 0; padding: 0; } footer ul { font-size: smaller; } ]]] However, what benefit does the <small> have for authors and users? The site doesn't style that piece of text differently from other text. Because that text starts with the copyright symbol, its purpose is clear without <small>. -- Ben Millard <http://projectcerbera.com/web/study/>
Received on Saturday, 17 January 2009 19:02:43 UTC