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

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

From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 13:57:13 +0100
Message-ID: <CA+ri+VmTyq_ZN4hvGE8GdeUfzT1OKSW-WWa=Cw1RM0pP87gPLQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Jukka K. Korpela" <jukka.k.korpela@kolumbus.fi>
Cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
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



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/>
Received on Tuesday, 17 September 2013 12:58:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:46:05 UTC