- From: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2009 17:15:08 +0200
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>, Smylers@stripey.com, public-html@w3.org
Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 10:49 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote: >> h1: >> - Extremely likely to be styled by the site in a way that's not appropriate >> for a figure/details heading. >> - Would interfere with attempts to infer an outline for the page. > > While default styling is a bit of an issue, I'm not sure how using > <h1> would interfere with the outline algorithm. <figure> is > explicitly a sectioning root, and <details> could presumably be made > one as well. > > As well, default styling isn't a huge issue. I think it's pretty > common to restyle your <hx>s anyway, and a simple "details > h1" rule > would catch most of it (obviously "details > h1:first-of-type" would > be best, but that's more complex, and more detail than will commonly > be needed I believe). Similarly "figure > h1" would allow easy > restyling. I believe reusing <h1> would interact poorly with legacy software that assumes headings should be used for navigation. In particular I would expect existing AT to have a problem with this. On the subject of the outline algorithm, it is unclear to me that <figure> should be a sectioning root. I would expect that figure > dd would be a sectioning root but one could use <h1> in figure > dt to include a figure in the outline view of a document.
Received on Thursday, 17 September 2009 15:15:34 UTC