- From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
- Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 16:51:29 +0000
- To: "Philip TAYLOR (Ret'd)" <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
- CC: Dustin Boyd <rpgfan3233@gmail.com>, www-html@w3.org, Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@webbackplane.com>, Brett Patterson <inspiron.pattersonb@gmail.com>, David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>, Molte <molte93@gmail.com>, Shavkat Karimov <shavkat@seomanager.com>
On 9/1/09 13:31, Philip TAYLOR (Ret'd) wrote: >> Since popular browsers seem more interested in implementing HTML5 than >> XHTML2, > > which is a great shame, because the XML semantics appear (to the > current author) to be both far more intuitive and far more useful > than those of HTML5. > >> this seems like a guarantee that they won't implement XHTML2, at least >> not as a whole, unless the specs converge on such points. > > Then let us hope that the benefits of the XML semantics are (or > become) obvious to all. Is there a major semantic advantage to "href" anywhere? Some browser vendors think it would be complex to overload elements with additional functionality: http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2006-August/007179.html Providing UI for XHTML2's omnipresent "href" attribute is non-trivial. What would be a good interface for nested links? <span href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML"><span href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypertext">HyperText</a> Markup Language</span> Or elements that are both hyperlinked and have some other functionality? <submit submission="submit" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML"><label>Go!</label></input> W3C's own Amaya attempts a nested link mechanism (for "cite" attributes on elements nested inside hyperlinks), but it's confusing since there's no visual distinction between the two. The suggested default CSS for XHTML2 - http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2007/ED-xhtml2-20071024/xhtml2-style.html#a_stylesheet - appears to replicate this usability problem for nested :link matches. This question has been raised before: "My concern is how nested links would be presented to users of non visual browsers? I am reminded of the concerns raised in the WCAG 1.0 ( http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/wai-pageauth.html#tech-divide-links ) where we it is written "render adjacent links distinctly, include non-link, printable characters (surrounded by spaces) between adjacent links." http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2003Jun/0119.html With respect to "img" alternative text, HTML5 has to define how to serialize an HTML5 DOM parsed out of XML to text/html. If HTML5 allowed content of the img element to be used as alternative text in the XML serialization, how would you suggest the following DOM be serialized in text/html? <img src="/images/cat/">A black <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball">cat</a> displays a certain <span lang="fr">je ne sais quoi</span> while playing with a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball">ball</a> of string</img> One answer might be to serialize it to: <object data="/images/cat/">A black <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball">cat</a> displays a certain <span lang="fr">je ne sais quoi</span> while playing with a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball">ball</a> of string</object> But that wouldn't actually _work_ in the most popular HTML client. Another answer might be to serialize it to: <img src="/images/cat/" alt="A black cat displays a certain je ne sais quoi while playing with a ball"> but that involves potentially substantial data loss. A third answer would be to serialize it to: <div>A black <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball">cat</a> displays a certain <span lang="fr">je ne sais quoi</span> while playing with a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball">ball</a> of string</div> But then people don't see an image. A fourth answer might be to serialize it to: <div><img src="/images/cat/" alt="">A black <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball">cat</a> displays a certain <span lang="fr">je ne sais quoi</span> while playing with a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball">ball</a> of string</div> But then people who can see the image also see the alternate content at the same time. I can't say as I think any of those are better options than advising authors to use "object" for complex alternatives. -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Received on Friday, 9 January 2009 16:52:22 UTC