W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > December 2010

[whatwg] <comment> element in HTML5 Spec?

From: Bruce Lawson <brucel@opera.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 17:54:26 -0000
Message-ID: <op.vnptcv18h8on37@bruce-pc>
On Tue, 14 Dec 2010 17:41:15 -0000, Richard Summers  
<Richard.Summers at bbc.co.uk> wrote:

> Using <article> elements within other <article> elements feels a bit like
> we'd just be replacing <div> for <article>, it seems to remove some of  
> the
> logical distinction between different types of content.
>
> As the use-case would potentially be huge (previously stated impact to
> Blogs/Message Boards/News outlets), is there any more mileage in perhaps
> using a <feedback> (or similar) element, as suggested by Bruce Hyslop?
>
> A <feedback>,or similar, (<response>?) element would distinguish content  
> as
> a response to an article, and therefore denote that it serves a different
> purpose to the main content in the <article> element.

I'm not sure such gradations of distinction are necessary or desirable.

A comment is "a self-contained composition in a document, page,  
application, or site and that is, in principle, independently  
distributable or reusable", as is an article that is commented on. As is a  
news item, a blog post,a book on Amazon.com, a video on YouTube, or a  
rakish gold sovereign ring on Argos.co.uk. We don't need <news>,  
<blogpost>, <book>, <video-entry> or <sovereign> - so do we really need  
<feedback> or <response>?

bruce
Received on Tuesday, 14 December 2010 09:54:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:29 UTC