- From: Cameron Jones <cmhjones@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 15:07:34 +0100
- To: Ian Yang <ian.html@gmail.com>
- Cc: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
more organized for who? the author or the consumer? this is author aesthetics. On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Ian Yang <ian.html@gmail.com> wrote: > By analyzing the example in HTML5 spec, wrapping all content elements can > make the structure of the document become more organized. After all, > content elements all being at the same level of <header> and <footer> is > unreasonable, and sometimes looks messy, especially when there are many > different kinds of content elements (p, figure, pre, a, table, ...... etc). > > 2012/6/29 Aurelio De Rosa <aurelioderosa@gmail.com> > >> I agree with Ian about the use of <article> and <section>, the >> specifications are really clear on those elements. The are used to wrap an >> entire entry, not the "content" (in the meaning Ian stated). >> >> The read question for me is: What is the problem of having the content at >> the same level of <header> and <footer> (for example inside an <article>)? >> >> Can't we treat everything inside an article which is not in <header> or >> <footer> is the real "content"? >> >> Best regards >> >> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Ian Yang <ian.html@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> As described in whatwg specs, a <section>, in this context, is a thematic >>> grouping of content, typically with a heading. >>> >>> As for a <article>, which usually contains its own <header> and <footer>, >>> is used to form an independent content like blog entry, comment, or >>> application. >>> >>> Both section and article elements are not the candidate for containing a >>> website or a blog entry's main content. That obviously is the reason that >>> the example of the nav in HTML5 spec doesn't use them. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Ian Yang >>> >>> 2012/6/29 Cameron Jones <cmhjones@gmail.com> >>> >>> > If the content is a special section within the document you should use >>> > the <section> element which has semantic meaning over <div>. >>> > Alternatively you could use <article> if it's distinct and >>> > self-contained. These two elements serve to disambiguate the abstract >>> > idea of content into something with semantic meaning which can be >>> > instrumented by document consumers. >>> > >>> > cam >>> > >>> > On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Ashley Sheridan >>> > <ash@ashleysheridan.co.uk> wrote: >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > Ian Yang <ian.html@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > > >>> > >>Hi editors in chief and everyone else, >>> > >> >>> > >>How have you been recently? >>> > >> >>> > >>As many of you may have been aware that there is an important >>> > >>sectioning >>> > >>element we have been short of for a long time: the "content" element. >>> > >> >>> > >>Remember how we sectioned our documents in those old days? It's the >>> > >>meaningless <div>s. We used them and added id="header", id="content", >>> > >>id="sidebar", and id="footer" to them. >>> > >> >>> > >>After HTML5 came out, we started to have new and semantic elements >>> like >>> > >>"header", "aside", and "footer" to improve our documents. >>> > >> >>> > >>However, today, we are still using the meaningless <div> for our >>> > >>content. >>> > >> >>> > >>The main content forms an important region. And we often wrap it with >>> > >>an >>> > >>element. By doing so, we distinguish the region from the header and >>> the >>> > >>footer, and also prevent all of its child elements (block level or >>> > >>inline >>> > >>level) being incorrectly at the same level as the header and the >>> > >>footer. >>> > >> >>> > >>In the first example of the intro section of the nav element in HTML5 >>> > >>Spec >>> > >>( http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/single-page.html#the-nav-element ) >>> (the >>> > >>page >>> > >>takes a while to be fully loaded), the bottom note states: "Notice the >>> > >>div >>> > >>elements being used to wrap all the contents of the page other than >>> the >>> > >>header and footer, and all the contents of the blog entry other than >>> > >>its >>> > >>header and footer." >>> > >> >>> > >>This example mentioned above is a typical situation that we need an >>> > >>element >>> > >>for the main content. So instead of keep wrapping our contents with >>> the >>> > >>meaningless <div>, why not let the "content" element join HTML5? >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >>Sincerely, >>> > >>Ian Yang >>> > >>Meaningful and semantic HTML lover | Front-end developer >>> > > >>> > > I am pretty sure this was discussed a few months back and the answer >>> was >>> > that everything is content, so no need for a content element. The >>> <header> >>> > and <footer> just mark up areas of that content with special meaning, >>> but >>> > its still all the main content. >>> > > >>> > > Thanks, >>> > > Ash >>> > > http://ashleysheridan.co.uk >>> > >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Aurelio De Rosa >> email: aurelioderosa@gmail.com >> email: a.derosa@audero.it >> website: www.audero.it >> user group: ug.audero.it >> >>
Received on Friday, 29 June 2012 14:08:04 UTC