Re: revisiting heading advice

I also agree and in practice that is what I currently do.


Kind regards,

Andrew


On 5 Jan 2014, at 17:40, Léonie Watson <tink@tink.co.uk> wrote:

> Steve Faulkner wrote:
> “I am thinking that it may be better to have a normative requirement on authors:
> 
> "Authors SHOULD use headings of the appropriate rank for the section's nesting level."
> 
>  
> what do other people think?”
>  
> I’ve had a partially completed bug about this open in my browser for the last couple of weeks. Agree the change in advice would be more practical.
>  
> Léonie.
> From: Steve Faulkner [mailto:faulkner.steve@gmail.com] 
> Sent: 05 January 2014 17:31
> To: HTMLWG WG
> Subject: revisiting heading advice
>  
> Currently the spec  says its OK to use all h1's in a document or all (h6's) for that matter as the heading rank is derived from the nesting level of a heading within sections, not from the numerical value in the elements name.
> 
> Unfortunately while the above may be true in theory its not true in practice.
> 
> The current text in the spec can lead to authors creating  flat document outlines: 
> 
> "Sections may contain headings of any rank, and authors are strongly encouraged to use headings of the appropriate rank for the section's nesting level."
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/sections.html#headings-and-sections
> 
> I am thinking that it may be better to have a normative requirement on authors:
> 
> "Authors SHOULD use headings of the appropriate rank for the section's nesting level."
> 
>  
> what do other people think?
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Regards
> 
> SteveF
> HTML 5.1