- From: Mallory van Achterberg <stommepoes@stommepoes.nl>
- Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2013 23:07:33 +0200
- To: public-html@w3.org
On Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 08:23:00PM +0100, Léonie Watson wrote: > Steve Faulkner wrote: >> “what are peoples thoughts on extending <small> to identify >> subheadings/subtitles taglines etc. when used as a descendant of a hx >> element?” > > I think it would be prudent to keep <small> for marking up small print like > legal disclaimers etc. Extending it to include taglines etc. would blur the > semantics too much. > > This does have echoes of the <hgroup> question though. I wonder whether it’s > worth revisiting the idea of a purpose built element for taglines, > straplines and the like? I've been using <small> for exactly this sub-heading use for some time now. While I could agree that it should be a "no" if it must remain more a fine-print/legal text semantic, the reason I've been using it over a span is really how I hear it in my head: the same way I hear small print and often stuff in parenthesis, and for this reason the text is indeed usually styled smaller (same reason legal text is). The fear of blurring the semantics more is, in my view, already done since HTML5 making a new meaning of an old tag pretty much means most developers will be using the original meaning, if any. I believe the use of small for sub-thingies in headings also predates HTML5, but someone would have to show evidence like Steve's hgroup research. The arguments of the Bootstrap guys are not very convinving; for them, any tag would do and they chose this one. Hey, they also use <li> for heading tags too. If some in the WG would rather stiffen up the usage of <small> to restrict this kind of random usage, I'd understand. And then we'd have more reason to figure out tagline solutions. OT: Then again I've continued using <address> for addresses, and would rather the name change to reflect "webmaster contact email". -Mallory
Received on Sunday, 7 April 2013 21:08:07 UTC