- From: Christian Wolfgang Hujer <Christian.Hujer@itcqis.com>
- Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 11:21:08 +0200
- To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Cc: Asbjørn Ulsberg <asbjorn@tigerstaden.no>, "HTML List" <www-html@w3.org>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi Björn, Hi Asbjørn, Dear list members, Am Mittwoch, 15. September 2004 20:43 schrieb Bjoern Hoehrmann: > * Asbjørn Ulsberg wrote: > >December 1st 2003, Christian Wolfgang Hujer made a proposition[1] to add > >the <addr> and <blockaddr> elements to XHTML 2.0 to replace the existing > ><address> element. I just wonder what the status on this proposal is, and > >why the <address> element in XHTML 2.0 still is a bueprint copy of HTML 4. > > http://hades.mn.aptest.com/cgi-bin/xhtml2-issues/Structural?id=7460 > which has been rejected with the note "Superseded by PR#7474" and > http://hades.mn.aptest.com/cgi-bin/xhtml2-issues/Structural?id=7474 > which has been rejected with the note > > BAE F2F:we have the structuring facility in XHTML, rather it is more > efficient to use the meta data (example use property="") Original idea > is described in PR#7460. For more discussion, see > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2003Dec/thread#3 > > Christian, did the HTML Working Group ever tell you that they rejected > your suggestion? Admitting to be a bit proud about some people reminding some of my suggestions for improving (X)HTML, I can't remember about the HTML Working Group ever telling me that they rejected my suggestion. But are they required to tell me? Those members of the HTML Working Group that communicated enough to give an impression about themselves left me with the feeling that they are nice but busy persons and they give their best to do a good job. So I don't mind wether they "forget" to tell me they rejected the one or the other idea of mine. So if you think, <address/> should be replaced by <addr/> and <blockaddr/> or <contact/> and <blockcontact/>, I suggest someone else rerises this isuse, don't count so much on me. I think I've already written so much to www-html-request that I fear some HTML WG member will tear off my head at the next best occasion ;-) (I'm sure I'm just still alive because they were too busy to find out my address irl ;-) Also, I'm quite busy with other things, and as much as I'd like to discuss issues about XHTML, I can't often find the time to do so. Also if I'm the only one insisting on an idea, maybe the idea isn't worth it. That's why I sometimes suggest something and then consequently keep my mouth shut about my suggestions. Back to the topic. Talking about the note at [1], I don't quite get the point how the structural difference between a block and an inline element should be achieved by a property attribute? Perhaps my samples were a bit misleading, giving a postal address and a URL only. Imho the issue about <address/> is not how to differ between different kind of addresses, like postal vs. URLs vs. addresses vs. whatsoever. The issue is about the document structure: Is the author intending to create a block element or an inline element for marking up that particular address? The example given in http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-xhtml2-20040722/mod-structural.html#sec_8.1. again demonstrates a long going issue about <address/>: Is this a block or an inline element? For the pedantic reader, the issue is clear: <address/> is block. But still the element name and the example are misleading. Authors are tempted to use <address/> like this: <p>The W3C Homepage is at <address href="http://www.w3.org/">http://www.w3.org</address>.</p> And I cannot complain about that "misuse" of the <address/> element. Replacing <address/> by <addr/> and <blockaddr/> or <contact/> and <blockcontact/> would solve this issue. Examples for <contact/> and <blockcontact/> Inline examples: <p>The best Pizza in whole Oberbayern, you get at <contact>Untermaxkron, Penzberg</contact>.</p> <p>To contact us, use the email address <contact href="mailto:info@itcqis.com">info@itcqis.com</contact>, our postal address <contact>ITCQIS GmbH, Ahornstr. 48, D-82377 Penzberg, Germany / EU</contact> or our phone number, <contact>+49 (0)8856 939 504</contact>.</p> Block examples: <h>Postal Address</h> <blockcontact> <l>ITCQIS GmbH</l> <l>Ahornstr. 48</l> <l>D-82377 Penzberg</l> <l>Germany / EU</l> </blockcontact> <h>Phone</h> <blockcontact>+49 (0)8856 939 504</blockcontact> <h>Email</h> <blockcontact href="mailto:info@itcqis.com">info@itcqis.com</blockcontact> I don't prefer <contact/> and <blockcontact/> over <addr/> and <blockaddr/>, please discuss which pair of elements you find better. [1] http://hades.mn.aptest.com/cgi-bin/xhtml2-issues/Structural?id=7460 [2] http://hades.mn.aptest.com/cgi-bin/xhtml2-issues/Structural?id=7474 Kind regards - -- ITCQIS GmbH Christian Wolfgang Hujer E-Mail: Christian.Hujer@itcqis.com WWW: http://www.itcqis.com/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2-rc1-SuSE (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFBSVsJMgwgpCF2K9sRAge2AJwLGmZardRoPry9516l4YOImWPYcACgjWi5 /Z6j6N9IfnZ/qzj7qhb6JMw= =yrZi -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Thursday, 16 September 2004 09:30:44 UTC