- From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 17:15:44 +1000
- To: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-html <public-html@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAHp8n2kutodyVCxyCNT1+FKAp9XkqyTGa6knbDEm9Y1Vy+j8+g@mail.gmail.com>
Oops, I meant to write "This *is* repeating information that is defined in the <main> element." So, what this patch does is the following: it adds to the elements <aside>, <footer>, <header>, and <nav> a note that these elements can't have a <main> element as their descendants. That's just repeating something that we already have defined in the <main> element, where we say: Contexts in which this element can be used<http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/single-page.html#element-dfn-contexts> : Where flow content<http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/single-page.html#flow-content-1> is expected, but with no article<http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/single-page.html#the-article-element> , aside<http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/single-page.html#the-aside-element> , footer<http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/single-page.html#the-footer-element> , header<http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/single-page.html#the-header-element> or nav<http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/single-page.html#the-nav-element> element ancestors. The only element for which we are not repeating this information is the <article> element. I guess that's because Ian believes there is a possibility to put <main> inside <article> elements. We could extend the patch to also be applied to <article> to say: Contexts in which this element can be used<http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/single-page.html#element-dfn-contexts> : Where flow content<http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/single-page.html#flow-content-1> is expected, but with no main element descendants . This would make it clear in both directions (ancestors and descendants). That's all. Silvia. On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 4:44 PM, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>wrote: > ? is this defined somewhere else other than the element defintion? if > thats the case then its fine > > -- > > Regards > > SteveF > HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/> > > > On 18 April 2013 07:41, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 4:16 PM, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com >> > wrote: >> >>> hi silvia, >>> >>> >>> * Restrict <main> from having <aside>, <footer>, <header>, or <nav> >>> ancestors (7817) >>> >>> https://github.com/w3c/html/commit/92a5ab6d36b3db8b655f88d080779bfd0f8b56a3 >>> >>> doesn't look like this was applied and ask that it not be applied as the >>> contexts in which main can be used are already defined in html 5.1 and the >>> rules are implemented the validator, >>> >> >> >> It's in nightly, so just staged for publication. This is why I do these >> cherry-picks - I can always revert them. However, I have a question. >> This repeating information that is defined in the <main> element. Why is >> that so bad to repeat it? In my view, it makes it easier for an author to >> find this information. >> >> Thanks, >> Silvia. >> > >
Received on Thursday, 18 April 2013 07:16:32 UTC