W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > July 2015

Re: [whatwg] Site-Wide Heading Element

From: Jonathan Zuckerman <j.zuckerman@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2015 16:31:33 -0400
Message-ID: <CAPP4rD-0KEGJ=LD7un8pU1MvW1fyYed-qbC8UYzVYHf98oxL4Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Pontus Horn af Rantzien <pontus.horn@gmail.com>
Cc: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org, Martin Janecke <whatwg.org@prlbr.com>
I agree that the title/banner/logo element doesn't add much value. I don't
feel like a tag to canonically declare the website name would add much
value either - isn't that what the domain is for? Also the tag wouldn't be
very trustworthy - the domain is less easy to lie about.

On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Pontus Horn af Rantzien <
pontus.horn@gmail.com> wrote:

> I don't see too much value in having a special element for the website
> title/logo/branding as shown in-page.
>
> I *can* see some value in canonically defining the website name inside
> <head>, e.g. for accessibility purposes. Let's say you navigate to a site
> you're not familiar with via search results, a link, etc. You skip to the
> content as that's what you're interested in, but you like the content and
> want to find out the name of the website. To my knowledge, there's no go-to
> place for that information. It might be part of the <title> or an <h1>, but
> both of those elements relate more to the page than the larger site.
>
> To me it'd make sense to define such an element as a companion to <title>.
> Many authors currently lump the website name and the page title together in
> an arbitrary format inside <title>. Having a separate element for the
> website name would serve to discourage that, and would let user agents
> present the two pieces of information in a consistent and predictable way.
>
> Regards,
> Pontus
>
> On Tue, 30 Jun 2015 at 12:46 Delfi Ramirez <delfin@segonquart.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > <logo> sounds nice to me.
> >
> > As far as we move onto standarized browsers and mobile devices as the
> > way we connect to the web, the proposed <logo> could be equal to the
> > reference or representation shown in _svg=icon _or_ link-rel="ico"_
> >
> > Just thinking.
> >
> > ---
> >
> > Delfi Ramirez
> >
> > My digital signature [1]
> >
> > +34 633 589231
> >  delfin@segonquart.net [2]
> >
> > twitter: delfinramirez
> >
> >  IRC: segonquart Skype: segonquart [3]
> >
> > http://segonquart.net [4]
> >
> > http://delfiramirez.info
> >  [5]
> >
> > On 2015-06-30 11:48, Martin Janecke wrote:
> >
> > > On 30.06.15 03:18, Garrett Smith wrote:
> > > On 6/29/15, Barry Smith <bearzteez@live.com> wrote: From: "Garrett
> > Smith" <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> Hey Garrett, My apologizes for not
> > replying until now. When I posted my reply to the "Site-Wide Heading
> > Element" thread, you were right and I should have posted a more complete
> > example. Here is what I should have given as an example: <header
> > id="banner"> <script src="scripts/header.js"
> > type="text/javascript"></script> <noscript> <div class="styledText"> <div
> > class="letterM">M</div> <div class="word">y</div> </div> <div
> > class="styledText"> <div class="letterW">W</div> <div
> class="word">eb</div>
> > </div> <div class="styledText"> <div class="letterS">S</div> <div
> > class="word">ite</div> </div> </noscript> </header> Using the <div>
> element
> > for purely stylistic purposes. Placing them within the <noscript> element
> > displays the exact same header as is in the embedded <script> element,
> but
> > without the additional animation used in the javascript file. I would use
> > an H1 with text-transform
> >  :
> > capitalize and avoid using divs and javascript.
> >
> > I agree with avoiding JavaScript. I am not sure about text-transform,
> > because I don't know which styling the author had in mind. He may want
> > to color every word's first letter differently.
> >
> > <div> is actually a neutral "block" element. The neutral "inline"
> > element <span> would seem like the better choice to wrap letters or
> > single words in the example. But you could wrap the whole line into one
> > <div>.
> >
> > I would not use <h1> because "My Website" is neither a heading for the
> > content of the page (unless maybe on the front page or a sitemap) nor
> > for a section of the page. It could be intended as a title for the whole
> > website, i.e. all its pages together, or as some kind of logo or
> > branding. I don't think we have a dedicated element for either of these
> > interpretations.
> >
> > Let's assume we would introduce a new element with the meaning "title
> > for the entirety of pages of a website". How would this be interpreted,
> > if such an element is used with different content on different pages of
> > the same website? I think such an element would cause inconsistencies
> > all the time. It isn't a good idea.
> >
> > Let's assume we would introduce a new element with the meaning "logo,
> > branding". What would its benefits be compared to <div>? And would
> > authors still want to use it if add-blockers get a little more
> > aggressive and offer the option to block logos?
> >
> > Martin
> >
> >
> >
> > Links:
> > ------
> > [1] http://delfiramirez.info/public/dr_public_key.asc
> > [2] mail:%20delfin@segonquart.net
> > [3] skype:segonquart
> > [4] http://segonquart.net
> > [5] http://delfiramirez.info
> >
>


On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Pontus Horn af Rantzien <
pontus.horn@gmail.com> wrote:

> I don't see too much value in having a special element for the website
> title/logo/branding as shown in-page.
>
> I *can* see some value in canonically defining the website name inside
> <head>, e.g. for accessibility purposes. Let's say you navigate to a site
> you're not familiar with via search results, a link, etc. You skip to the
> content as that's what you're interested in, but you like the content and
> want to find out the name of the website. To my knowledge, there's no go-to
> place for that information. It might be part of the <title> or an <h1>, but
> both of those elements relate more to the page than the larger site.
>
> To me it'd make sense to define such an element as a companion to <title>.
> Many authors currently lump the website name and the page title together in
> an arbitrary format inside <title>. Having a separate element for the
> website name would serve to discourage that, and would let user agents
> present the two pieces of information in a consistent and predictable way.
>
> Regards,
> Pontus
>
> On Tue, 30 Jun 2015 at 12:46 Delfi Ramirez <delfin@segonquart.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > <logo> sounds nice to me.
> >
> > As far as we move onto standarized browsers and mobile devices as the
> > way we connect to the web, the proposed <logo> could be equal to the
> > reference or representation shown in _svg=icon _or_ link-rel="ico"_
> >
> > Just thinking.
> >
> > ---
> >
> > Delfi Ramirez
> >
> > My digital signature [1]
> >
> > +34 633 589231
> >  delfin@segonquart.net [2]
> >
> > twitter: delfinramirez
> >
> >  IRC: segonquart Skype: segonquart [3]
> >
> > http://segonquart.net [4]
> >
> > http://delfiramirez.info
> >  [5]
> >
> > On 2015-06-30 11:48, Martin Janecke wrote:
> >
> > > On 30.06.15 03:18, Garrett Smith wrote:
> > > On 6/29/15, Barry Smith <bearzteez@live.com> wrote: From: "Garrett
> > Smith" <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> Hey Garrett, My apologizes for not
> > replying until now. When I posted my reply to the "Site-Wide Heading
> > Element" thread, you were right and I should have posted a more complete
> > example. Here is what I should have given as an example: <header
> > id="banner"> <script src="scripts/header.js"
> > type="text/javascript"></script> <noscript> <div class="styledText"> <div
> > class="letterM">M</div> <div class="word">y</div> </div> <div
> > class="styledText"> <div class="letterW">W</div> <div
> class="word">eb</div>
> > </div> <div class="styledText"> <div class="letterS">S</div> <div
> > class="word">ite</div> </div> </noscript> </header> Using the <div>
> element
> > for purely stylistic purposes. Placing them within the <noscript> element
> > displays the exact same header as is in the embedded <script> element,
> but
> > without the additional animation used in the javascript file. I would use
> > an H1 with text-transform
> >  :
> > capitalize and avoid using divs and javascript.
> >
> > I agree with avoiding JavaScript. I am not sure about text-transform,
> > because I don't know which styling the author had in mind. He may want
> > to color every word's first letter differently.
> >
> > <div> is actually a neutral "block" element. The neutral "inline"
> > element <span> would seem like the better choice to wrap letters or
> > single words in the example. But you could wrap the whole line into one
> > <div>.
> >
> > I would not use <h1> because "My Website" is neither a heading for the
> > content of the page (unless maybe on the front page or a sitemap) nor
> > for a section of the page. It could be intended as a title for the whole
> > website, i.e. all its pages together, or as some kind of logo or
> > branding. I don't think we have a dedicated element for either of these
> > interpretations.
> >
> > Let's assume we would introduce a new element with the meaning "title
> > for the entirety of pages of a website". How would this be interpreted,
> > if such an element is used with different content on different pages of
> > the same website? I think such an element would cause inconsistencies
> > all the time. It isn't a good idea.
> >
> > Let's assume we would introduce a new element with the meaning "logo,
> > branding". What would its benefits be compared to <div>? And would
> > authors still want to use it if add-blockers get a little more
> > aggressive and offer the option to block logos?
> >
> > Martin
> >
> >
> >
> > Links:
> > ------
> > [1] http://delfiramirez.info/public/dr_public_key.asc
> > [2] mail:%20delfin@segonquart.net
> > [3] skype:segonquart
> > [4] http://segonquart.net
> > [5] http://delfiramirez.info
> >
>
Received on Wednesday, 1 July 2015 20:32:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 1 July 2015 20:32:22 UTC