Re: suggestion for abolition of <hgroup>

On 11/30/2010 03:24 PM, Bruce Lawson wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Dec 2010 00:10:45 +1000, Leif Halvard Silli
> <xn--mlform-iua@målform.no> wrote:
>
>
>>> I can't see a use-case for multiple adjacent headings in a header
>>> that wouldn't be heading+subtitle(s).
>>
>> Well, to me it happens quite frequently, especially early in a work,
>> that I create a section heading and a subsection heading without adding
>> any text between the two, and without intending that the two are
>> concatenated in an outline algorithm.
>
> Indeed. What I meant (and this is for clarification, rather than
> reinforcement; I'm not married to this idea, merely trying to find a way
> of makking <hgroup> more useful):
>
> if you have a <header> - which people have no difficulty understanding
> is introductory content - and, within that <header> you have adjacent
> headings, then the subordinate ones become subtitles, and are removed
> from the outline.
>
> So
>
> <header>
> <h1>brucelawson.co.uk</h1>
> <h2>Gorgeousness in a gimp mask</h2>
> </header>

This sounds like scary dark magic. The semantics of heading elements — 
aka the outline algorithm — already has enough weird cases to make it 
hard to understand (e.g. the implicit creation of sections by <hX> 
elements). I would prefer that we didn't add more. A nice property of 
the current solution is that it is rather explicit so people who do use 
it are likely to do so mostly correctly.

Received on Tuesday, 30 November 2010 15:10:15 UTC