- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 17:52:54 +0200
- To: Ian Devlin <ian@iandevlin.com>
- Cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Ian Devlin, Tue, 7 May 2013 17:45:00 +0200: > 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. You are right. That was an unlucky choice of wording. But visually it does demote - as it makes the text smaller. I would say that it is an advantage that the 'demoting' is only visual and not semantic, because, when the full heading - with subtitle and all - is supposed to go into the outline, the I’d argue that there is no demoting going on. Hence, despite that unlucky wording, I stand by my point. If one place the subtitle inside a <p>, below a <hx> element, *then* one has demoted it, semantically ... Leif H Silli > On 7 May 2013 17:21, Leif Halvard Silli 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 15:53:24 UTC