- From: Ian Devlin <ian@iandevlin.com>
- Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 17:45:00 +0200
- To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAOYOhSscDsp63jTSTNiLgvYa9Pk=XNF3VAR5jHyupkL8ApeoYw@mail.gmail.com>
The purpose of <small> is not to demote, the specification doesn't say that at all: http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-html5-20110525/text-level-semantics.html#the-small-element It even goes as far as saying that it does not demote the importance of elements within <small> that are marked up with <strong> and/or <em> and that if you wish to mark the contents of a <small> as important it should be wrapoed in <strong>. This implies that <small> itself has no effect on the importance of its content. On 7 May 2013 17:21, Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>wrote: > Steve Faulkner, Tue, 7 May 2013 15:08:05 +0100: > > well no it {note: <small>} 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 > > Short answer: > > (1) <small> should be fine, of above use case. But (2) why not simply > recommend to use <br> for this use case? > > Longer answer: > > I scanned the discussion last month about <small> - and I could not > find any discussion of outline there. But if the <strong> proposal > implies > > <h1>Main.</h1><p>Sub.</p> > > when one doesn’t want it in the outline, but > > <h1><strong>Main.</strong> Sub.</h1> > > when one does want it in the outline, then, for *that* use case, > <small>Sub.</small> seems better than <strong>Main.</strong>, because: > > 1) it has intuitive CSS - getting the CSS right using <strong>, > would be lots of (unintuitive) work, whereas <small> is simple > to style, though usually not require any CSS > 2) we are after demoting the subtitle part - and the role of > <small> is to demote. > 3) with regard to the outline, it has the same effect as > <strong>. > 4) the semantic change would also be more involved if we went > for <strong>Main</strong> as it would require both a a > change to <strong>, when <strong> occurs inside <hx/>, and > a change of <hx> when <strong> is a child. > > However, for the use case when the outline should contain the subtitle, > the <br/> element ought to be possible as well. Currently spec says:[1] > > ]]br elements must be used only for line breaks that are actually part > of the content, as in poems or addresses.[[ > > And it seem to me we could just add ”or subdivided headings” in the > last part, after the comma. We could the leave it up to authors to > style subtitles using the elements that suites them (even using > <small> - if we clarifies that <small> can be used for that). > > [1] > > http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/text-level-semantics.html#the-br-element > > Leif Halvard Silli > > > > SteveF > > HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/> > > > > > > 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 15:45:29 UTC