- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 15:04:39 +0100
- To: public-html@w3.org
On 03/09/2015 16:02, Matt Di Pasquale wrote: > Patrick, yes, I was suggesting adding it to HTML5. Navigation sections may contain more than just a single list, so adding <nl> as a new element seems overly specific as a request. For the same reason, just having <li> as children of <nav> would require some complex further algorithm to work out how to map things once there's more than a list inside the navigation section, too... In short, I'm not sure it's worth it/possible, personally... P > Marat, that works too. I also that of that. > > On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 10:57 AM, Marat Tanalin <mtanalin@yandex.ru > <mailto:mtanalin@yandex.ru>> wrote: > > 03.09.2015, 16:53, "Matt Di Pasquale" <liveloveprosper@gmail.com > <mailto:liveloveprosper@gmail.com>>: > > <nav> > > <ul> > > <li><a href="/">Home</a></li> > > <li><a href="/about">About</a></li> > > <li><a href="/contact">Contact</a></li> > > </ul> > > </nav> > > > > Why do I need the extra nav element? Wouldn't it be simpler if I could remove the nav element and perhaps replace the ul element with an nl element? > > Instead of inventing another navigation-semantics element like `NL`, > it would probably be more reasonable to be able to omit nested `UL` > and put `LI` items directly inside `NAV`. > > -- Patrick H. Lauke www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
Received on Friday, 4 September 2015 14:05:03 UTC