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

Re: Always use h1-h6 by level again

From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 15:50:57 +0100
Message-ID: <CA+ri+Vn3vYGmX9w9tot3jgPZOx4ce6pwKNLzE7n8i3DXyO7tHg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Travis Leithead <travis.leithead@microsoft.com>
Cc: John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com>, Geoffrey Sneddon <me@gsnedders.com>, Chaals McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>, "White, Jason J" <jjwhite@ets.org>, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
+1

--

Regards

SteveF
Current Standards Work @W3C
<http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2015/03/current-standards-work-at-w3c/>

On 19 April 2016 at 15:43, Travis Leithead <travis.leithead@microsoft.com>
wrote:

> I don't want this to sound like I'm trying to shut down this thread (I'm
> not), but this sounds like a great idea to put through the WICG incubation
> process. Especially since you've already got some momentum here on this
> thread. I suggest one of you write-up the proposal and get it started! All
> the right folks should be in that community (including browser folks) to
> help gather the support necessary to get some trial implementations.
>
> https://www.w3.org/community/wicg/
> https://github.com/wicg/
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Foliot [mailto:john.foliot@deque.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 5:53 AM
> To: 'Geoffrey Sneddon' <me@gsnedders.com>
> Cc: 'Chaals McCathie Nevile' <chaals@yandex-team.ru>; 'White, Jason J' <
> jjwhite@ets.org>; 'Alastair Campbell' <acampbell@nomensa.com>; 'HTML WG' <
> public-html@w3.org>
> Subject: RE: Always use h1-h6 by level again
>
> Geoffrey Sneddon wrote:
> >
> > > 2) Should we contemplate pursing a new <h> element that would pursue
> > > this
> > nesting idea slightly differently (closer to the XHTML2 model)?
> > >
> > >         I would support that effort, yes. It would be interesting to
> > > pursue the
> > stateless Heading element, but I fear we may not get support from the
> > browser vendors, but it would be worth the ask.
> >
> > Given it's so slightly different, I wonder if there's any more chance
> > of it getting implementation support.
>
> Which is why I suggested that we may not get the support from browsers,
> although, again, I think it's worth having the discussion. There is some
> value in the idea, and I for one would be curious to hear from browsers
> "why not"? Is there a legitimate reason why browsers haven't taken this up,
> outside of "we didn't think of it first"?
>
> JF
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 19 April 2016 14:52:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 19 April 2016 14:52:06 UTC