W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > July 2009

Re: Editorial: maybe redundant definition on sectioning content

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 09:05:28 +0000 (UTC)
To: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
Cc: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0907150905060.23663@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Simon Pieters wrote:
>
> "Some elements, for example address elements, are scoped to their 
> nearest ancestor sectioning content. For such elements x, the elements 
> that apply to a sectioning content element e are all the x elements 
> whose nearest sectioning content ancestor is e."
> 
> address was changed to apply to only article and body.
> 
> Are there other elements that use the above definition? If not, it can 
> be dropped.

I removed the aforementioned concept and rearranged the remaining parts of 
the spec that mentioned it.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 15 July 2009 09:06:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:48 UTC