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

Re: ISSUE-83 ACTION-152 Change Proposal for the use of dt/dd in figure and details

From: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 11:15:24 +0100
Message-ID: <4AFA8EBC.3000406@opera.com>
To: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
CC: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Shelley Powers wrote:
> I finished the change proposal for this action item and this issue, located at:
> http://burningbird.net/html5/dtdd.htm

This change proposal seems to contain two competing proposals:

a) Remove <figure> and <details> from HTML5
b) Use something else in place of <dd> and <dt> in <figure> and <details>

This is problematic because b) is a change I could live with whilst a) 
is one that I could not live with. I could also live with:

c) Maintain the status quo.

For this reason it would be difficult to give a good answer to whether I 
support, or even "can live with" the proposal. If it came down to it I 
would have to say "no" since the proposal contains the possibility of a 
change that I cannot live with.

I don't think it makes sense to have a change proposal that talks about 
changing the definition of dd/dt without taking a definite position on 
what to do with elements that depend on the current definition. In 
general I think an individual change proposal should represent one 
complete and consistent change to the spec rather than requiring 
multiple sequential change proposals to be applied to get the spec into 
a consistent state.
Received on Wednesday, 11 November 2009 10:15:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:03 UTC