- From: Markus Ernst <derernst@gmx.ch>
- Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 23:03:12 +0100
Am 28.02.2011 19:56 schrieb Tab Atkins Jr.: > > I believe you're arguing that the "wrapper" semantic, being similarly > ubiquitous, thus needs its own new element as well. What you're > missing is that the "wrapper" semantic is precisely what<div> already > expresses. I do understand usuario's <wrapper> proposal slightly different from <div>: Section 4.5.13 of the spec generally states that the <div> element is conveying structure, but not semantics. Usuario's <wrapper> is not structural, but purely presentational. It should actually not be there at all from an HTML point of view, but is necessary for CSS reasons. I agree with Bjartur Thorlacius' point that it makes more sense to enhance CSS the way that presentational markup gets totally obsolete in the future - but the idea of an element that is explicitly non-structural does not look that odd to me.
Received on Tuesday, 1 March 2011 14:03:12 UTC