- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 09:34:35 -0500
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 3:36 AM, Mikko Rantalainen < mikko.rantalainen at peda.net> wrote: > If <dialog> is used instead of <dialogue> then it should be designed in >> a such way that it can be used for dialog box in addition to dialogue >> (e.g. chat) in the future. > > I severely doubt this is possible or desirable. It would make it *more* confusing, I think, if <dialog> was meant for dialog boxes *and* marking up conversations. Just to throw out yet another possibility, how about <convo>? I don't like it too much, but it at least avoids most of the issues that plagued the other submissions. I'm generally convinced that <dialog> is an okay choice for this, but if we *were* to change, I at least want to make sure it's something I can get behind. My personal favorite alternate suggestion so far has been <cl>. Short and a little confusing? Maybe. But it has the benefit of being unambiguous and parallels existing tags with similar syntax. But meh, it's probably not quite right, as <dialog> isn't meant to be illustrating a conversation list, but rather is a list illustrating a conversation. ~TJ > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20080514/f73331b5/attachment.htm>
Received on Wednesday, 14 May 2008 07:34:35 UTC