- From: ddailey <ddailey@zoominternet.net>
- Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 19:40:15 -0500
Why not borrow the <g> from SVG (meaning "to group together" -- the semantics may be a bit more accessible in some cross-linguistic sense than <wrap>, particularly because of the silent "w" in "wrap" which throws a lot of folks for a loop)? <g> has very rich semantic connotations inherited from MacDraw, circa 1983, but the distinction between denotative and connotative semantics within HTML5 isn't altogether clear to me. Maybe it is clear in someone's brain. The distinction between <span> and <div> isn't all that obvious since we have CSS N.x waiting in the wings to override whatever behavioral semantics we might offer from script and markup, so perhaps a study of parentheses is in order. My first study of parentheses in the 1970's suggested there were at least twelve different kinds, including all the obvious mathematical ones. Why might you wish to group things? If the grouping is presentational, then that would be one obvious category; if it is semantic, then that would be another, at least according to the zeitgeist. Given that SVG and HTML are now interminglable in the same document, why not start intermingling their tag definitions? cheers David ----- Original Message ----- From: "usuario" <soyhobo@gmail.com> To: <whatwg at lists.whatwg.org> Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 3:20 PM Subject: [whatwg] wrapper element > Tiis may seem somewhat silly, every front-end developer have ever used a a > wrapper div, shouldn't it be more semantic to have a wrapper element? > >
Received on Sunday, 27 February 2011 16:40:15 UTC