Re: 4.13.1 Bread crumb navigation - use of right angle brackets

thanks Jukka,

note the proposed changes are in the editors draft for review, if you could
add your comments to the bug for this it would be helpful
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22739

--

Regards

SteveF
HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>


On 17 September 2013 13:29, Jukka K. Korpela <jukka.k.korpela@kolumbus.fi>wrote:

> 2013-09-17 12:13, Steve Faulkner wrote:
>
>> I have updated the advice on marking up breadcrumb navigation:
>> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/**drafts/html/master/common-**
>> idioms.html#rel-up<http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/common-idioms.html#rel-up>
>>
>
> The use of <ol> markup for anything that might be seen as an ordered list
> deviates from common practice for no good reason. It implies a default
> rendering that is practically never the desired one. So why take the
> trouble of using specific markup when its real effects are definitely not
> what you want.
>
> Even if you think that <ol> is a possibility here, would it really be
> something to be recommended in favor of other alternatives?
>
>
>
>> On 26 January 2013 17:00, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com<mailto:
>> faulkner.steve@gmail.**com <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>>> wrote:
>>
>>     Section 4.13.1 Bread crumb navigation (under Common idioms without
>>     dedicated elements [1])
>>
>>      encourages the use of the right angle bracket to indicate a
>>     breadcrumb navigation trail:
>>
>>
> It is GREATER THAN sign, and I agree that it is not adequate. But it has
> become common enough to become tolerable practice. A better character is a
> real arrow, “→”.
>
>
>
>>     The use of > in this context does not appear to be a good practice to
>>     promote as the angle bracket is a symbol that depending on user agent
>>     (AT in this case) is typically announced as "greater" or not announced
>>     in this context. Either way it is not clearly convyed that its a
>>     breadcrumb trail.
>>
>>  Using <ol> would not express the idea of breadcrumb trail either. It
> suggests a numbered list of items, typically used when there is a reason to
> use explicit numbering.
>
> “Bread crumb trail” is a concept specific to web pages and similar digital
> presentations, so there is no traditional way to present it, visually or in
> speech. Digital media creates its own traditions, in time. Even the “>”
> notation is not as odd as it may sound. People get used to things that they
> see or hear often. Visually, too, the use of “>” is a matter of convention:
> it is a mathematical comparison operator gone wild, and as such “Main >
> Products” is illogical visually, too: it does not say that Main is greater
> than Products.
>
> If there is something to be fixed in 4.13.2 in HTML5 CR, it’s the use of
> <p> instead of <div>. It is pseudosemantic, since this is not about
> paragraphs in any normal sense – except as blocks of text. And <div> is a
> pure block element, which has no default margins, so it is more adequate
> here. Alternatively, a <ul> element with two <li> elements, each containing
> one bread crumb, could be used.
>
> --
> Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~**jkorpela/ <http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/>
>
>
>