- 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