Re: dt/dd in figure/details has killer rendering issues in ie6 and ie7

On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 3:49 PM, Shelley Powers
<shelleyp@burningbird.net> wrote:
> Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 8:02 PM, Leif Halvard Silli
>> <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Tab Atkins Jr. On 09-09-18 22.25:
>>> [...  bike shed comment ignored ...]
>>>
>>
>> Don't take that as an insult; I was involved in the discussion too,
>> remember.  It was a factual description of the threads.  ^_^
>>
>>
>
> I think we would get further in these discussions if when we disagree with
> folks, we don't categorize discussions of interest in a derogatory manner.
> "Bikeshed" is a derogatory, dismissive term.
>
> Suggestion in the future: if you're not interested in topic, if you consider
> it trivial, then ignore it. Perhaps we would have more succinct, and useful,
> discussions if only interested parties participated.

And again, I was part of the discussions.  I doubt I'd be derogatory
or dismissive toward myself.  It was tongue-in-cheek.

> Whatever the technical issues are moot -- my original objections still
> stands: the way that dt/dd is used and reused throughout the HTML5
> specification create an unnecessary level of confusion for web page authors,
> developers, and designers.
>
> Contrary to expectations in this group, web page authors, developers, and
> designers are also an audience for HTML5.

For what it's worth, I'm exclusively a web author.  And I like <dt>
and <dd> in <details>.  I don't like how it's used in <figure>,
because the name is horrible, and if we have *both* a horrible name
and require a hack to get it to work, it's just not worth it in my
opinion.

~TJ

Received on Tuesday, 22 September 2009 21:52:43 UTC