- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 21:39:13 +0000 (UTC)
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004, Matthew Raymond wrote: > > Fine, then if we're doing away with vendor UA interpretations of headers, > let's specifically define them as only having the following semantic meaning: > > 1) Header elements contain only two kinds of header information: the header > title and the importance of the document segment is heads. > > 2) Headers can indicate the beginning of a document segment, but otherwise > have no other structural meaning. They would not indicate the depth of a > segment within a document structure, nor its relation to other segments. > > 3) The value of "n" in an <hn> element, a.k.a. the importance level, has no > affect semantic meaning related to document structure. It is meant only to > indicate the importance of the information contained in the document segment > that follows it. > > On a side note, I've also been considering having the |level| attribute of > <section> automatically take the level of the first heading inside the > <section> element, unless that heading is an <h> element. > > | <section> > | <h2>Header A</h2> > | <section> > | <h>Header B</h> > | </section> > | </section> > > In the above example, "Header A" would have an importance level of two, and > "Header B" would have the importance level of three. > > Hmm. Not sure if I like that or not. What do you think? It's not clear to me why this would be better than what we now have. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 20 February 2008 13:39:13 UTC