Re: Is the current definition of the article element in HTML useful?

Some changes to how article is defined have filtered through to HTML 5.1[1]
from hixies spec.

do they make <article> clearer in its use?

note, there has been no chnage to advice on use for comments




On 23 January 2013 10:41, Steve Faulkner <> wrote:

> Hi all,
> I think the definition of the article element in HTML [1] is overly
> vague and broad, which leads to intended and unintended use that
> undermines its usefulness as a semantic construct for users that
> actually consume its semantics such as screen reader users.
> For example, the spec promotes the use of article as a container of,
> well, an article and also for each instance of a comment on an article
> (example: [2]).
> Yet there is no defined method of exposing the semantic differences
> between an article in the common understanding of the term and when
> used as defined in the broader HTML definition.
> I suggest that the authoring advice and requirments in regards to the
> article element need to be reviewed and perhaps modified in light of
> usage data [4], how the semantics are exposed and conveyed in user
> agents, issues articulated in articles and blog posts (example: [3])
> on how to use it and feedback from users and developers.
> [1]
> [2]
> [3]
> [4]
> --
> with regards
> Steve Faulkner

with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG | |
HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives -
Web Accessibility Toolbar -

Received on Friday, 1 February 2013 09:54:34 UTC