- From: Matthew Raymond <mattraymond@earthlink.net>
- Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 12:06:03 -0500
Mikko Rantalainen wrote:
> How about the following example (doesn't nicely fit the western document
> authoring style, but anyway):
>
> HEADING1
>
> This is a paragraph related to heading 1.
>
> This is a paragraph related to heading 1.
>
> HEADING 1.1
>
> This is a paragraph related to heading 1.1.
>
> This is a paragraph related to heading 1.1.
>
> This is a paragraph related to heading 1.
>
> This is a paragraph related to heading 1.
>
> (text indented to show the logical structure)
>
> SECTION element is able to describe structures like this, H1-H6 isn't.
Cool. I hadn't really thought about this situation. Let's see if I
can fit it into my previous <section>/<h> proposal:
| <section>
| <h>HEADING1</h>
| <p>This is a paragraph related to heading 1.</p>
| <p>This is a paragraph related to heading 1.</p>
| <section>
| <h>HEADING 1.1</h>
| <p>This is a paragraph related to heading 1.1.</p>
| <p>This is a paragraph related to heading 1.1.</p>
| </section>
| <p>This is a paragraph related to heading 1.</p>
| <p>This is a paragraph related to heading 1.</p>
| </section>
Yeah, that should work.
> I support including both SECTION and DI. But if SECTION isn't required,
> I cannot see why DI should be required.
Apples and oranges. For instance, why couldn't unordered or ordered
lists within a definition list be used?
| <dl>
| <dt>CSS</dt>
| <dd>
| <ol>
| <li>Cascading Style Sheets</li>
| <li>Content Scrambling System</li>
| </ol>
| </dd>
| <dt>etc</dt>
| <dd>et cetera</dd>
| </dl>
So, unless there's a use case I haven't anticipated, the question
becomes whether or not we need the additional element to simplify the
markup or to supply additional semantics.
Received on Thursday, 10 March 2005 09:06:03 UTC