- From: James Clark <jjc@jclark.com>
- Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2010 10:18:48 +0700
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <AANLkTik17fQ6q+p093F5nsW=Zpe2E_UMAvoemPbVbSMp@mail.gmail.com>
On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 2:10 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: > > For this markup: > > <hgroup> > <h1>HTML</h1> > <h2>A markup language for the Web</h2> > </hgroup> > > ...a rule to style the subheading would be: > > hgroup > h2 { ... } > > In practice there's no need for a generic solution since the author of the > CSS also controls the markup. I would accept that in most cases there is no need for a fully generic solution. Nonetheless I think there will be cases where generic solutions are desirable. For example, I can imagine wanting to write an XSLT transform to generate a ToC or to perform heading autonumbering, and ideally I would want it to work on any valid XHTML5 document, so it could be useful to as wide an audience as possible. I wonder whether the following formulation of hgroup has been considered: hgroup contains flow content with exactly one child (or possibly descendant?) which is an h[1-6]. With this formulation, your example might become: <hgroup> <h1>HTML</h1> <div>A markup language for the Web</div> </hgroup> I prefer this because the part that is marked as an <h1> is the part that behaves like an <h1> for all purposes (including the outline). The heading-ness of the subheading is indicated by the inclusion of the subheading in the <hgroup>; there is no logical need to repeat this by also marking it as an <h2>. This allows hN to be used exclusively to indicate the main heading of a Nth-level section. James
Received on Thursday, 30 December 2010 03:19:20 UTC