- From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 00:55:49 +0200
- To: Mathew Marquis <mat@matmarquis.com>
- Cc: whatwg <whatwg@whatwg.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
hi Mat, The RICG published a stand-alone “use cases” document a while back ( > http://usecases.responsiveimages.org ), to facilitate work on the > extension specification. Is anything like this in the works for > `main`/`content`/`maincontent`, at present? Seems like it would be a good > next step! > right, will work on it. Hixie, can you point me to the uses cases developed for adding header/footer/section/article/aside etc? As it would be good to have some related source material to work from. I had a look on the WHATWG wiki and serached the WHATWG mail archive and couldn't find anything. regards SteveF On 18 October 2012 22:27, Mathew Marquis <mat@matmarquis.com> wrote: > > On Oct 18, 2012, at 2:36 PM, Ian Hickson wrote: > > > > > I just wanted to make sure everyone is clear that this <maincontent> part > > is not part of the HTML specification, and is not a WHATWG specification. > > We have previously had miscommunications about this kind of thing, e.g. > > with responsive images, where there was some expectation from some people > > that if a proposal got written up, it would be adopted. This is not the > > case; what decides whether a proposal is adopted or not is whether it has > > real use cases and compelling reasoning. > > Off-topic, but just for the record: there was no expectation that the > RICG’s proposal would simply be accepted wholesale, for obvious > reasons—just that we would be able to collaborate with the WHATWG on it. It > wouldn’t have made much sense for us to call it a “proposal” otherwise, > after all. :) > > On-topic: the `main` class/ID pattern is an exceedingly common one, for > sure. I use it all the time myself, in conjunction with `role="main"`. > > I was originally of the mind that the role of “primary content” was served > by the first `article` element within the document, but where the first > `article` just represents the first sectioned stand-alone content in the > document, it could be something like an infographic — capable of > functioning independent of the surrounding document, but not the entirety > of the primary content. Given the clear meaning of the proposed element, > the low barrier to adoption by web developers, and the potential benefits > this could have in terms of syndication and accessibility: it certainly > sounds interesting! > > The RICG published a stand-alone “use cases” document a while back ( > http://usecases.responsiveimages.org ), to facilitate work on the > extension specification. Is anything like this in the works for > `main`/`content`/`maincontent`, at present? Seems like it would be a good > next step! > >
Received on Thursday, 18 October 2012 22:56:56 UTC