- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 12:26:19 +0200
- To: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Steve Faulkner, Thu, 7 Apr 2011 10:37:56 +0100: > what are the arguments for/against adding a role value to indicate > when a h1-h6 is acting as a subheading? > > <h1>heading</h1> > <h2 role=subheading> subtitle </h2> Arguments against @role=subheading/@subheading: Unclear subheading connection: Is the <h2> still a subheading if there is e.g. a <p> between <h1> and the <h2 role=subeading> ? <h1>heading</h1> <p>Lorem </p> <h2 role=subheading> subtitle </h2> Or, what if the <h2 role=subheading> appears before the <h1>, how is it then clear that it "belongs" to the <h1>? Unclear purpose of @subheading: A @suheading attribute very easily looks like a @does-not-affect-outline attribute. If that is what it is, then I'd rather *have* a @does-not-affect-outline attribute <h3 does-not-affect-outline > suptitle </h3> <h1>heading</h1> <h2 does-not-affect-outline > subtitle </h2> Accessibility: Usually, when an element is connected to another one, then this relationship should be expressed EITHER directly: <h3 subheading-for="idref" > subtitle </h3> <h1 id="idref">heading</h1> <h2 subheading-for="idref" > subtitle </h2> OR indirectly - via nesting: <h1>heading <element> subtitle </element> </h1> And, in fact, HTML5' current solution is a form of indirect connection. -- leif halvard silli
Received on Friday, 8 April 2011 10:26:49 UTC