- From: Jim Jewett <jimjjewett@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 21:23:10 -0400
- To: "Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis" <benjaminhawkeslewis@hotmail.com>
- Cc: www-html@w3.org
On 9/23/06, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <benjaminhawkeslewis@hotmail.com> wrote: [ A very good summary of the problems with the existing draft, almost all of which I have snipped ] > Too many components seem to be doing the same thing: > 1. <h1>, <h2>, <h3>, <h4>, <h5>, <h6> and <h> (possibly also > <label>, <caption>, and <th>) I agree -- if it isn't backwards compatible, there really isn't any need for h#; h by itself is close enough for human compatibility. (Or will be, once it is clarified whether the h attaches to its parent or its following sibling(s).) And the other three -- are also really the same, except that they apply to columns/rows/tables/controls instead of sections. Should they all be renamed title? (Other element merges were deleted from my reply) > 2. The so-called "structural" distinction between block > and inline elements ... q/blockquote and code/blockcode I agree. It is probably past time to just add a "structure" attribute which (on many element types) will have a default value. This would also solve the "grandchild" problem, in which, say, paragraphs cannot contain paragraphs, but should be able to contain blockquotes that do. > ... it's deeply confusing to include elements/attributes > but then discourage their use, as with the style attribute Agreed. > ... devices may not support the use of in-line styles. Is this speculation, or are there really devices that ignore inline style but still support style elements and/or external stylesheets? > ... there seem to be five ideas about how meaning > can be conveyed in XHTML: > 3. XML elements from other namespaces (e.g. from > MathML, SVG, etc.) in XHTML+whatever documents Allowing this is good. Requiring it would be awful. If documents in a speciallized field require one specialized mixin language (or two), that is OK. If almost every author and almost every reader has to deal with namespaces, then there won't be much point to xhtml itself. -jJ
Received on Sunday, 24 September 2006 01:23:13 UTC