W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > May 2013

Re: using strong to indicate a title?

From: Denis Boudreau <dboudreau@accessibiliteweb.com>
Date: Tue, 07 May 2013 11:19:51 -0400
Message-id: <1A7AEE92-1853-4811-85A7-2E5046057AAE@accessibiliteweb.com>
To: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Steve,

So I understand that <hgroup> was binned because of the fact that whatever was in there was outside the outline. For the same reason, using any type of heading wouldn't be advisable because you don't necessarily want that sub heading to BE part of the general outline, right?

Are there other cases in HTML where an element serves a specific purpose but in some specific context, serves another one? I'm sure there are, but I can't think of any right now. And if there are, I'm sure that adds to the confusion of understanding how each element needs to be used. That rings true for using <strong> or <small> with <h1>.

So if <hgroup> was canned because authors sometimes wanted to that sub heading to be part of the outline, then why not just create a <subheading> element, only meant to be used inside an existing <hx> element?

<h1>
	<subHeading>Breaking News</subHeading>
	Steve Faulkner had this crazy idea!
</h1>

/Denis




On 2013-05-07, at 10:08 AM, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote:

> well no it wasn't which is why it was binned.
> 
> the circumstance is where you have a title/subtitle that you want to include in the 'outline' but the subtitle does not start a new section/subsection
> 
> --
> 
> Regards
> 
> SteveF
> HTML 5.1
> 
> 
> On 7 May 2013 15:02, Christopher Healey <deezignink@gmail.com> wrote:
> hgroup was perfect for just this circumstance.
> 
> -Christopher
> 
> 
> On May 7, 2013, at 9:58 PM, Mallory van Achterberg <stommepoes@stommepoes.nl> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 09:52:09AM -0400, Denis Boudreau wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I do like Steve's proposal using an existing element in h1 to create some sort of a hierarchy. But I must admit that the first thing that came to mind when reading Steve's proposal for <strong>, I wondered why the proposal wasn't for <small>. So depending on whether you want the smaller heading above or below the larger one, we could do either of the following:
> >>
> >> <h1>
> >> <small>Breaking News</small>
> >> Steve Faulkner had this crazy idea!
> >> </h1>
> >>
> >> <h1>
> >> Breaking News
> >> <small>Steve Faulkner had this crazy idea!</small>
> >> </h1>
> >>
> >> /Denis
> >>
> >
> > Of the two, I like the second one better. Small has always meant
> > "sub" in my mind, read out loud differently like legal text and
> > under-the-breath mutters. First example makes much less sense, since
> > if you just want a styling sandbag, span makes more sense.
> >
> > -Mallory
> >
> 
> 
> 


Received on Tuesday, 7 May 2013 15:20:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:46:02 UTC