W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January 2010

Re: (not really) Re: Alternate proposals for ISSUE-83

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:39:02 -0800
Cc: public-html@w3.org
Message-id: <9D978352-2051-426A-A619-E31640424682@apple.com>
To: Krzysztof Maczyński <1981km@gmail.com>

On Jan 14, 2010, at 5:46 PM, Krzysztof Maczyński wrote:

> Sorry, Maciej, for sending it previously to you only. I clicked a  
> wrong button.
> I'll repeat my proposal (apparently unnoticed by others than  
> Shelley), noting that Shelley's Change Proposal doesn't meet my  
> expectation, and also that it's about details per se, not dt or dd.  
> Why not have a details element (possibly more than one even)  
> _inside_ the element for which the author provides details and have  
> them go into that element? That's more natural and flexible, it  
> seems to me.

I think this would not work well with the intended semantics,  
rendering and behavior of <details>. See the example in the spec that  
includes pictures. It also does not cover <figure>. Your proposal  
would require every element to potentially have expand/collapse  
rendering and behavior based on whether it contains <details>  
children, which is both painful to implement and hard to understand.

Received on Friday, 15 January 2010 02:39:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:07 UTC