- From: Diogo Resende <dresende@thinkdigital.pt>
- Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 10:22:21 +0100
I actually don't see the point on having <summary><h1>..</h1></summary> instead of <summary>..</summary>. -- Diogo On Wed, 2010-10-27 at 22:52 -0400, Hugh Guiney wrote: > I am authoring a video portfolio page using Kroc Camen's Video For > Everybody code <http://camendesign.com/code/video_for_everybody> for > each piece. In this code he includes a download section for users who > may be unable to play the video live on the site, e.g. because they > lack both HTML5 (or the proper browser codecs) and Flash support. As > this hopefully won't be a problem for most users, I would prefer not > to distract them with this information unless they decide they need > it, and therefore have chosen to mark it up with <details>. > > However, I feel this "Download" portion is also important enough to be > its own subsection, as it is distinct from the surrounding content and > may be useful to navigate to as part of the document outline. The > obvious way to accomplish this would be for instance: > > <details> > <summary><h1>Download</h1></summary> > <ul> > <li><a href="video.mp4">MP4</a></li> > <li><a href="video.ogg">OGG</a></li> > ... > </ul> > </details> > > but this is invalid via the current spec which only allows <summary> > to contain phrasing content. I could give it its own heading outside > of <details>, but this would be redundant as I would have to do > duplicate the heading text in both <h1> and <summary>, and it makes > the expansion action area ambiguous. A mouse user might encounter the > collapsed menu and not know whether to click on the heading or the > summary to expand it?or even just consider it the author's error, or a > glitch. > > Even if I were to use different text for each element, I find few > things to be appropriate in this context that are not similarly > redundant. "Download" for the heading and "Video Format Options" for > the summary? The fact that the list is of format options would be > reasonably apparent by the link text for each item indicating "MP4", > "OGG", etc. > > My proposal to address this would be to allow heading content under > <summary>?or, conversely, to allow <summary> to be used as a > descendant of <details> rather than just the first child, such that > you could wrap headings around it, as phrasing content is already > allowed under <details>. But, the latter changes structure and > therefore parsing whereas the former is simply a validation change.
Received on Thursday, 28 October 2010 02:22:21 UTC