W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2016

RE: Triage - close 13726 ("DT/DD too vague") as "too vague"?

From: Léonie Watson <tink@tink.uk>
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2016 14:57:01 +0100
To: "'Chaals McCathie Nevile'" <chaals@yandex-team.ru>, "'HTML WG'" <public-html@w3.org>
Cc: "'Steve Faulkner'" <sfaulkner@paciellogroup.com>
Message-ID: <209701d19330$de733320$9b599960$@tink.uk>
> From: Chaals McCathie Nevile [mailto:chaals@yandex-team.ru]
> Sent: 07 April 2016 20:32
> In today's Bug Triage call we said we would move
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13726 to the github
> tracker, and assign it to Steve.
> But I am not sure that's a  good idea - I'd rather wait until there is a clear
> proposal before filing issues regarding the semantics of elements, so I am
> wondering if it makes more sense just to close the bug.

I don't entirely agree with the issue as described. The use of the dfn element in the examples seem appropriate, and several examples demonstrate the use of dl/dt/dd without dfn.

That said I do think the definition for dl, and probably dt and dd too, could be improved for readability. Not to change the semantics, but just to make the semantics easier to understand.


@LeonieWatson tink.uk Carpe diem.
Received on Sunday, 10 April 2016 13:57:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 10 April 2016 13:57:39 UTC