- From: Jeremy Keith <jeremy@adactio.com>
- Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 12:11:58 +0000
We seem to be straying behind the bikeshed a little bit here. My point wasn't to point out problems with the examples given in "common idioms without dedicated elements" http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/commands.html#conversations The real problem is the definition of the <time> element itself: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/text-level-semantics.html#the-time-element This sentence: "This element is intended as a way to encode modern dates and times in a machine-readable way so that user agents can offer to add them to the user's calendar." ...should be changed to: "This element is intended as a way to encode modern dates and times in a machine-readable way." The overly-restrictive clause at the end canonises a single use case as the only usage of the element. The fact that there examples elsewhere in the spec that contradict this definition highlights the problem, but the issue isn't with those examples; it's with the definition of <time>. HTH, Jeremy -- Jeremy Keith a d a c t i o http://adactio.com/
Received on Saturday, 28 November 2009 04:11:58 UTC