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

Re: restrictions on blocks inside inlines (was Re: HTML5 Authoring Conformance Study)

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 02:08:41 +0100
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, HTMLwg WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20100322020841019492.28428b67@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Leif Halvard Silli, Mon, 22 Mar 2010 01:27:50 +0100:
> Maciej Stachowiak, Sun, 21 Mar 2010 13:11:35 -0700:
>> On Mar 21, 2010, at 9:14 AM, L. David Baron wrote:
>>> On Sunday 2010-03-21 08:22 -0400, Sam Ruby wrote:
>>>> youtube.com:
> That question is for instance related to the <hgroup> element - we 
> don't need <hgroup> if we can place block elements inside <hn> 
> elements. I can also not see that we need <hgroup> if we can place 
> block elements inside <object> inside <hn>. As I have said before: 
> <h1><object><p>abc<p>def</object></h1> is more compatible with html 
> outline interpreters than <hgroup><h1>....</h1</hgroup> is.



creates 2 items in the heading outliner of iCab. (I have heard that 
screen readers also have problems with <hgroup>, and I would not be 
surprised if they have the exact same problem.)

Whereas this (which is illegal in HTML4),


creates only one. As does this example, which is valid HTML4 (but 
invalid HTML5):


As many elements that HTML5 has attempted to reinterpret, <hgroup> is 
an amazing proposal ...
> So, to hammer down a point: The authoring requirements of HTML5 are not 
> only related to authoring, but even to which kind of new elements HTML5 
> should have.
leif halvard silli
Received on Monday, 22 March 2010 01:09:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:13 UTC