Re: proposal: clarification of nav element

Hi Bruce,

I don't have any issue with what is currently in the spec, but it does
appear that for others there is ambiguity. i.e. that <nav> some how has
magical list like semantics or should have.

I am suggesting a note that clearly states that nav does not imply list
semantics and that if the links in a <nav> element are  a list of links
then and the author wants to convey this through markup then mark them up
as such.

My motivation here is to reduce the amount of author confusion, so they can
get on with more productive tasks than debating the meaning of the what
they perceive to be HTML chicken scratchings ;-)

regards
Steve

On 4 February 2013 12:24, Bruce Lawson <brucel@opera.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 04 Feb 2013 11:48:23 -0000, Steve Faulkner <
> faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  Judging from comments on a recent blog post [1] there appears to be some
>> confusion in the developer community about nav element semantics and what
>> it does as implemented.
>>
>> I propose that an explanatory note be added to the current definition text
>> to make it clear that <nav> does not equal a list
>> of navigation linksand that if a list of link is what is required then use
>> a list.
>>
>
> It seems already to say that:
>
> "The nav element represents a section of a page that links to other pages
> or to parts within the page: a section with navigation links.
>
> Note: Not all groups of links on a page need to be in a nav element — the
> element is primarily intended for sections that consist of major navigation
> blocks. "
>
> Or do you means something like "A list of links that are not navigation
> around the site or page - for example, a list of sponsored links, a list of
> "other reading" or allied sites, should not be <nav>" ?
>
>
> Bruce Lawson
> Open standards evangelist
> Developer Relations Team
> Opera
>
> http://dev.opera.com
>