- From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2007 12:41:05 +1100
- To: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
- Cc: Jens Meiert <jens.meiert@erde3.com>, www-html@w3.org, help-whatwg.org@lists.whatwg.org
Steven Pemberton wrote: > The title element gives metadata about the document. In XHTML2's unified > treatment of metadata, the title element is considered as a shorthand for > > <meta property="title">Your title text here</meta> > > But the meta element *can* contain other elements, so if you need to > have a title with elements, then that is the place to put it: If that's the case, then why doesn't XHTML2 just make the content model of <title> and <meta> the same? Why confuse authors by requiring that they use a completely different element if they want to include markup within it? Where in the XHTML2 spec does it actually define the UA conformance requirements for treating <title> as shorthand for that <meta> element, or vice versa? It states [1]: | The title of a document is metadata about the document, and so a title | like <title>About W3C</title> is equivalent to <meta about="" | property="title">About W3C</meta>. But neither that statement, nor any others I could find, include any conformance criteria. Which takes precedence if both are specified, and they differ? In fact, which takes precedence if an author inclueds 2 or more title elements? Besides, allowing markup in titles at all seems to ignore the fact that most uses for title are limited to plain text, and thus not useful. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/mod-document.html#sec_7.3. -- Lachlan Hunt http://lachy.id.au/
Received on Friday, 9 March 2007 01:40:55 UTC