- From: Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com <mtanalin@yandex.ru>
- Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 23:07:55 +0400
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org>,public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
> So what happens in browsers that don't support components? Or in search > engines or other data analysis tools that are trying to extract the > semantics from the page? Elements with custom tag-names would have EXACTLY SAME semantic (as for core HTML5 semantics) meaning as a common container (SPAN or DIV) with a class. No more and no less. P.S. FWIW: my proposal for custom elements: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14011 04.05.2012, 22:58, "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>: > On Fri, 4 May 2012, Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com wrote: > >> Instead, they have _local_ semantics which purpose is known exclusively >> for document author/scripts and/or consumers of the document. No any >> "fallbacks" needed here at all. > > So what happens in browsers that don't support components? Or in search > engines or other data analysis tools that are trying to extract the > semantics from the page? > > Having elements with no well-defined semantic meaning is counter to the > entire philosophy of the Web, IMHO. I strongly disagree that we should be > even attempting to allow it, let alone optimising for it. > > -- > Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL > http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. > Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Friday, 4 May 2012 19:09:34 UTC