- From: Michael <mike@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 16:57:49 +0900
Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch>, 2009-10-14 03:41 +0000: > As far as I can see the options are as follows: > > 1. Drop support for <details> and <figure> for now, revisit it later. > > 2. Use <legend>, and don't expect to be able to use it in any browsers > sanely for a few years. > > 3. Use <dt>/<dd>, and don't expect to be able to use it in old versions > of IE without rather complicated and elaborate hacks for a few years. > > 4. Invent a new element with a weird name (since all the good names are > taken already), and don't expect to be able to use it in IE without > hacks for a few years. > > I am not convinced of the wisdom of #4. I prefer #2 long term, but I see > the argument for #3. In terms of the Priority of Constituencies principle, it'd seem to me that between #2 and #3, #2 will -- in the long term -- ultimately have lower costs and difficulties for authors, though higher costs and difficulties for implementors in the short term. I would think a big red flag ought to go up for any proposed solution that we know will lead to introducing complicated and elaborate hacks into new content. For one thing, we know from experience that due to cargo-cult copy-and-paste authoring, such hacks have a tendency to live on in content for years after the need for them in widely used UAs has disappeared. http://www.w3.org/TR/html-design-principles/#priority-of-constituencies -- Michael(tm) Smith http://people.w3.org/mike/
Received on Wednesday, 14 October 2009 00:57:49 UTC