![]() |
|
![]() |
||
![]() |
![]() |
|
[WWW-HTML Mailing List Archive Home] [Messages By Thread] [Messages By Date] Re: XHTML2: Proposal for total separation of semantics from structure
From: Orion Adrian <orion.adrian@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 15:23:56 -0400 Message-ID: <abd6c8010508301223e49dd2e@mail.gmail.com> To: www-html@w3.org On 8/30/05, Laurens Holst <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl> wrote: > Orion Adrian schreef: > >>> I disagree, for element names should carry the main semantics, and > >>> prefer myself something like this: > >>> > >>> <"some parent with only block children allowed"> > >>> <code class="pre"/> > >>> </> > >>> > >> I disagree with that, class doesn't convey any semantic information, and > >> if the code being preformatted is important to the clarity or even > >> functioning of the code, it should use <pre> appropriately and not rely > >> on the stylesheet. > >> > > Why doesn't class convey semantic information? > Because it doesn't, per specification. Quoting: > > The class attribute has several roles in HTML: > * As a style sheet selector (when an author wishes to assign > style information to a set of elements). > * For general purpose processing by user agents. > > > Why aren't we styling > > elements based on their semantic classification as opposed to string > > that people just make up like "l76blue". I'd rather limit class to > > semantic structures and just style those. > > > But that is not the case right now, in HTML 4, and existing content will > contain nonsensical information in their class attributes, which makes > them useless to process. A set of values for the class attribute could > be standardised, but because there's so much 'noise', it can't be relied > upon, which makes it quite unreliable and useless from a machine > processing point of view (which is why they are added in the first place). > > I'd say that is the reason new attributes such as @role and @property > are needed. Those can make a fresh start, and because they are only > specified when they actually have semantic meaning, a user agent > (including search engines) can do something with it... Except both @role and @property are being used for something else. @class is a field that lists the objects that meet the following statement. This element is-a object. OR This element can-be-classified-as object. @property is more open. Specifically it represents the relationship with the contents providing the object value. The fundamental problem with @property is that on elements that aren't meta it doesn't allow for all the relationships that can exist for an element. If you use it for an is-a relationship it doesn't cover the whatever other relationships might pop up much less an additional relationship other than is-a. What we need is a way to represent triplets for an element (like meta, but for any element). Class was useful, but what we need is a typed version of class specifically for is-a relationships because they are the most common for determining behavior and appearance. -- Orion AdrianReceived on Tuesday, 30 August 2005 19:24:04 GMT |
|
||||||||||||||||