- From: Remy Sharp <remy@leftlogic.com>
- Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 16:24:53 +0100
I should add, another argument for using small to wrap, is that without it, on a list element, the numerals in the list are larger than the the small print text - because the small element is on the inner HTML rather than the entire element (which does effect the numeric bullets too). Remy Sharp On 7 Aug 2009, at 14:19, Remy Sharp wrote: > Hi, > > I know Bruce Lawson has mentioned that this has been brought up > before, but I couldn't find it in the archives (searching "small"), > so I'd like to bring it up again. > > The HTML 5 spec says: > > "Small print typically features disclaimers, caveats, legal > restrictions, or copyrights. Small print is also sometimes used for > attribution, or for satisfying licensing requirements." > > http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/text-level-semantics.html#the-small-element > > So I'm making a list of disclaimers for my site: > > <ol> > <li>You must agree to this term</li> > <li>And this term too</li> > <li>And don't break this term</li> > <li>And don't forget the milk</li> > </ol> > <p>By reading this, you're agreeing to xyz</p> > > To make this valid, and small print text, I need to individually > wrap the inner HTML of each inline element (li and p elements). > This is wasteful and very much like the situation that we had with > the a element when we wanted the whole block to be clickable. > > When I wrap *everything* in the small element (as seen here: http://jsbin.com/okevo > ) all the browsers I've tested it in renders the text as I would > expect, but it doesn't validate against the HTML 5 parsing rules (as > you'd expect). > > If this element is truly for disclaimers, caveats and restrictions, > and not stylistically making something small, then it will be > typically used on blocks of content, be it a single line or multiple > paragraphs. As such, it seems sensible to say that the small > element can have nested block elements within it. > > Here's the list of the compatible browsers (I could have done more > browsers, but I think this test with 10 proves the support is solid): > > http://leftlogic.litmusapp.com/pub/a5fa8ed > > <small>At time of writing, the last test is still being generated, > but I've tested Firefox 3.5 manually and it passes</small> ;-) > > > Cheers, > > Remy Sharp > Left Logic > > ___________________________ > > I'm running a conference in Brighton on 20-Nov called: > > Full Frontal JavaScript Conference > http://2009.full-frontal.org >
Received on Friday, 7 August 2009 08:24:53 UTC