Re: <subline> becomes <subhead> and other updates

Hi, Steve, Jukka 

Maybe the problem, in the first place, comes from the fact that the
*small* element doesn't have a precise definition. It seems to me that
it has any strong semantic meaning. "side comments such as small
print", doesn't mean much to me and I don't believe I ever found
myself asking me which element to use for caveats or legal
restrictions (that are, for most of the content, just paragraphs,
no?).

In the other hand, I've always struggled to choose the most
appropriate element for subheadings or taglines.
The "de-emphazising" side of *small* was implicitly adopted by many
web authors (and it seems quite natural to me, as I want to believe
that *small* is not a semantic-less element).

As an author, I really need subheadings and taglines. All the time. In
my opinion, if a new element can't do the job with a consensus, could
the *small* element be redefined so to promote the de-emphazising
role?

Cheers,
Angela Ricci

Invited Expert

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Faulkner" 
To:"Jukka K. Korpela" 
Cc:"HTMLWG WG" 
Sent:Sat, 8 Jun 2013 17:48:49 +0100
Subject:Re:  becomes  and other updates

Hi Jukka, 

>I still wonder what is the problem that such proposals are supposed
to solve.

I outlined some of the reasons for the proposal here
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2013May/0173.html [1]

 Here is what i think developers want (not necessarily need) anybody
feel free to add/subtract disagree etc

- A way to indicate part of a heading is differentiated from another
part as in title/subtitle/alterntive title
  - A way to indicate that text is not a heading but is closely
associated with a heading and more specific than a paragraph.
-  Easy ways to style such content
on top of that the semi-mythical outline algorithm wants /needs a way
to identify things that isn't heading content that should be included
in the outline, which is why  was foisted upon us.

If the problem being solved is authors' question "which markup should
I use for...", then I would say that such a problem needs no solution
in the form of a new markup element. People have solved such problems
over 20 years, with whatever HTML elements are available. There is no
need for unification, partly because there is no objectively
definable, reasonably exact definition for the structure that the new
elements are supposed to indicate.

I tend to agree, but am exploring ideas such as  as i think part of my
job as an editor of the html spec is to try to make solid authors
suggestions and see if we can make something useful. Its the same
reason I have pursued the discussion on small, to stimulate discussion
and see if we can make progress on it even reach some rough
consensus...

I have no great enthusiasm for pushing this proposal any further than
it currently is (i.e. an unofficial draft) in the process. But if it
goes no further, but helps make it clearer that such an element is not
needed or would not be supported by browsers etc, then it serves a
useful purpose. It may also make us think that perhaps the use of  to
indicate de-emphasised text in general is all we need to indicate some
bits of a heading are subordinate to others.

 But others may disagree and wish to put further effort into  or some
other idea, if so I would support that. (anybody thinking about this
should read Extension How To
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ExtensionHowTo [2])

--

Regards

SteveF
HTML 5.1 [3]

On 8 June 2013 17:04, Jukka K. Korpela  wrote:
 2013-06-08 16:21, Steve Faulkner wrote:
  becomes  and other updates
http://rawgithub.com/w3c/subline/master/index.html [5]

 I still wonder what is the problem that such proposals are supposed
to solve.

 Surely there are often parts of headings that might be classified as
"subheads", for example. Or they might seen as parts of headings
styled differently. Is there some need to force authors into using one
specific markup for them, as opposite to dealing with it with  or  or
whatever? Even if this means that *no* currently used browser supports
such markup?

 If the problem being solved is authors' question "which markup should
I use for...", then I would say that such a problem needs no solution
in the form of a new markup element. People have solved such problems
over 20 years, with whatever HTML elements are available. There is no
need for unification, partly because there is no objectively
definable, reasonably exact definition for the structure that the new
elements are supposed to indicate.

 I would like to draw your attention to the book that has probably the
best-known title with "sublines", The Origin of Species:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Origin_of_Species_title_page.jpg [7]
The book cover has a longish heading presented in four or five
different font sizes, divided in a manner that would presumably call
not only for  but also  and , if we think that any part of a heading
that *could* be viewed as being structurally different from the rest
*must* be marked up with a tag that indicates that.

 -- 
 Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/ [8]

 

Links:
------
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2013May/0173.html
[2] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ExtensionHowTo
[3] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/
[4] mailto:jukka.k.korpela@kolumbus.fi
[5] http://rawgithub.com/w3c/subline/master/index.html
[6] http://t.co/xWQE2owXRm
[7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Origin_of_Species_title_page.jpg
[8] http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/