- From: Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>
- Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:22:36 -0500
- To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- CC: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Smylers@stripey.com, public-html@w3.org
Leif Halvard Silli wrote: > Tab Atkins Jr. On 09-09-17 19.59: > >> On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Shelley Powers >> <shelleyp@burningbird.net> wrote: >>> I have stated that dt/dd will not work for web page authors, and >>> have my >>> arguments for such an opinion. This is no different than anyone else >>> saying >>> such and such won't work because legacy browsers will crap out. Both >>> are >>> describing a point of potential failure, and deserve to be respected >>> for >>> such. >> >> As an author, using <dt>/<dd> for <details> seems fine. The letters >> match up, which is important from a mnemonic pov, and the basic idea >> works as well. <dt> in <dl> is "description title" to me, while <dd> >> is "description data". In <details>, they're instead "details title" >> and "details data". > > > So, perhaps <figure> could be renamed to something beginning on <d...> > ? ;-) de figure de Shelley
Received on Thursday, 17 September 2009 21:23:26 UTC