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

[whatwg] 'Main Part of the Content' Idiom

From: Daniel Persson <danielperssondeluxe@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2010 17:05:54 +0200
Message-ID: <AANLkTikfy1xgz3VKI_HQCIEMXLkDg0yr1xdnMs94xxKg@mail.gmail.com>
If i view the html-web as it is now, inside <body> there are so much
irrelevant content (where else to put it?). In order for <body> to be the
main content, there has to be tags for everything else. This will be very
hard for authors to implement (I am talking real world, amateur,
do-it-yourself, stressed professionals). It is IMHO very beautiful
code-wise, and organisationally, to state that everything in <body> is main
content, but it will not benefit a structurally marked-up web.

Thanks
/Daniel

On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 4:37 PM, Ashley Sheridan <ash at ashleysheridan.co.uk>wrote:

>  On Fri, 2010-06-04 at 16:27 +0200, Daniel Persson wrote:
>
> I am the one posting the question on the help list. To me, the lack of
> html5 definition of main content, ie body copy in paper publishing, is a big
> mistake. Imagine the amount of sites where "everything else" includes a lot
> of unimportant extra, or peripheral, content. Content which is not
> necessarily hierarchically legible by a machine. Getting authors to be
> disciplined about defining main content is more important than being
> disciplined about <nav>, <footer>, <header>, <section> etc, in order not to
> negate the meaning of html5 structural mark-up.
>
>
>
>  Suggestion <bodycopy>... or, preferred, <bread>.
>
>
>
>  /Daniel
>
>  On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Smylers <Smylers at stripey.com> wrote:
>
> The HTML5 spec should define how to mark up the main content on a page
> (even if the answer is "by omission"). This is something that many
> authors ask about, the latest example being today's thread on the help
> mailing list:
> http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/help-whatwg.org/2010-June/000561.html
>
> Please could this be added to the 'idioms' section, perhaps giving
> examples of when <article> or <section> might be appropriate as well as
> one in which the main content is simply that which isn't in <header>,
> <aside>, etc.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Smylers
> --
> http://twitter.com/Smylers2
>
>
>
>
> It's my understanding that everything within the <body> tag is considered
> body content, and the new <header> and <footer> tags, etc, are just there to
> give more meaning about the type of body content.
>
>   Thanks,
> Ash
> http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20100604/f65278b1/attachment.htm>
Received on Friday, 4 June 2010 08:05:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:24 UTC