- From: Jens Meiert <jens@meiert.com>
- Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 22:40:49 +0200
- To: Smylers@stripey.com
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
> > Thus, I think we can expect authors to use “time” for stuff like > > <time>500 BC</time>, <time>2 pm</time>, <time>2025</time>, > > and maybe even <time>yesterday</time>. > > Does that matter? Well, I think it’s at least interesting that we’re so keen to include elements like e.g. “header” and “footer” to reflect common practice, but might fail anticipating future common practice when it comes to other elements. > Following the current spec, the preferred markup for each of the above > is simply not to use any tags at all -- which is effectively how user > agents will treat them anyway, since no valid date or time can be parsed > from them. So users get the same experience either way. Actually, I’d rather take that as a point to remove the “time” element from the spec (which is not what I wanted to suggest). “Semantic fuzziness” of certain elements has already been a problem with former HTML specifications. -- Jens Meiert http://meiert.com/en/
Received on Tuesday, 5 May 2009 20:41:44 UTC