Re: Implementor feedback (dialog and datepickers)

On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 10:19 PM, Leif Halvard
Silli<> wrote:
> Jonas Sicking On 09-09-03 01.46:
>> On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 6:21 PM, Lars Gunther<> wrote:
>>> 2009-09-02 22:57, Lars Gunther skrev:
>>>> Yes, CSS would be the means to implement the actual voice changes, but
>>>> we still need semantics to hook into. Without a dedicated element for
>>>> dialog
>>> Continuing my sentence:
>>> what would the markup actually look like?
>> You could use:
>> <section>
>> <p class="says juliet">O Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou Romeo? Deny
>> thy father and refuse thy name; Or if thou wilt not, be but sworn my
>> love and I'll no longer be a Capulet.</p>
>> <p class="says romeo aside">Shall I hear more, or shall I speak at
>> this?</p>
>> ...
>> </section>
>> I certainly agree that <dialog> adds more explicit semantics. However
>> I see two problems:
>> 1. The current <dialog> element adds support for only the most basic
>> dialogs. As several have pointed out it's inadequate in many cases.
>> Such as for irc conversations you'd want to mark up joins and leaves.
> The WHATwg irc log only uses <ol>. That is a much simpler format than <dl>.
>> For plays you'd want people doing something ("drinks the bottle of
>> poison") etc, and possibly also scene and act changes.
> There are microformats for "complicated dialog", see Joe Clark[1].

> [1]

I couldn't actually see a microformat defined there? Mind pointing me
more directly at what you are referring to?

>> 2. Are dialogs really common enough to warrant their own element? If
> Dialog is common - perhaps just not within _our_ ranks ... ;-)

Dialog is common for sure. Dialog marked up in HTML pages I'm less
sure. Though interviews might actually be fairly common in HTML pages.

>> we look at the microformat efforts, microformats have been created to
>> mark up calendar events, peoples contact information, licenses,
>> reviews, recipes and much more. However no one has taken the time to
>> create a microformat for dialogs. Based on that it seems more urgent
>> to add a <recipe> element than adding a <dialog> element.
> Thus you go for using <dl> for dialog, as HTML 4 explicitly allows?

I would probably recommend <p>. But that's just a personal preference.
Has anyone checked with the people that was in the HTML WG at the time
of HTML4 to see why they recommended <dl>?

/ Jonas

Received on Thursday, 3 September 2009 01:51:14 UTC