![]() |
|
![]() |
||
![]() |
![]() |
|
[WWW-HTML Mailing List Archive Home] [Messages By Thread] [Messages By Date] Re: [XHTML 2] removal of navigation list element
From: Anne van Kesteren <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 19:00:30 +0200 Message-ID: <429B46AE.2020700@annevankesteren.nl> To: Laurens Holst <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl> CC: www-html@w3.org Laurens Holst wrote: >> Why just this element? A lot of elements can be removed now there is a >> way to use RDF features to describe them. XHTML 2.0 could probably be >> reduced to the xhtml2:html, xhtml2:div and xhtml2:span elements and >> various attribute modules. >> >> However, I'm not sure if such abstraction is a good idea. > > It probably isnâ??t :). > > There is a basic set of elements in the language to add semantics, > however a line has to be drawn somewhere, otherwise youâ??ll end up with a > docbook-kind of specification and the introduction of <irony> elements. Sure, but some elements are not really needed to exist as an element. An obvious example would be xhtml:var. Relatively compared I guess its usage on the web is 0%. > As I understood from Pembertonâ??s XTech 2005 lecture, the role attribute > was invented for that reason; to be able to add semantics to the > document which do not warrant their own element. Although I heard he's a great speaker, the specification matters, not what people say about it. > A better example would probably be the now valid: > > <section role="navigation"> > <h>Browse around, freely</h> > > <p>Various sections of this site include: > <nl>...</nl> > </p> > </section> I'm not sure if I'd agree with that. Perhaps I should have used xhtml2:div instead of xhtml2:p though, as it's not really a paragraph of text. >> The ROLE attribute on the SECTION element indicates its relation to >> other sections within the document where the NL element describes the >> function. > > I donâ??t think there is a difference. > > Given your example, why have an <nl> element there? The list is in the > navigation section of the document, why say again that it is for > navigation? Because I could also have a normal list in there summing up some advantages of navigation. > The fact that the list items themselves are hyperlinks can be derived by > their href="" attributes. Similarly, if a definition list were used for > navigation, e.g. Please tell me where this is specified that UAs should implement this in such a way. > <dl> > <dt href="tiger.php">Tiger Hash implementation for Z80</dt> > <dd>Just a quick and nice side-project to see how well MSX could > handle the supposedly well-scalable 64-bit Tiger hash algorithm. DOS 2 > executable and sources included.</dd> > </dt> I think this is incorrect usage of the DL element that has existed for some time now on the web. Apparently XHTML 2 didn't redefine DL to be a more generic element so I'd consider this particular example to be non conforming. > Following your reasoning, wouldnâ??t that - in line with the <nl> element > - also warrant a <ndl> (navigation definition list) element of some > kind? Not for your example. > What about a <p href="something"> inside the section with the > navigation role? Is that not for navigation, too? What says that > navigation should only be a list? Are you suggesting that everything that is a link should have a |role="navigation"| applied to it or should be inside an element that has that applied to it? I don't think that would make sense. I think it should be defined in such a way that |role="navigation"| denotes the area of navigation and that NL contains the "navigation bar". > What if you had a > > <section role="navigation"> > <h>Browse around, freely</h> > > <nl> > <label>Various sections of this site include:</label> > <li>About me</li> > </nl> > </section> > > What is more â??navigationâ?? about this list than any other list? Does a > navigation list require all content to have hyperlinks on them (this one > has none)? But the label (...) certainly isnâ??t a link. If you are on the "About me" page at the moment I guess you don't need to include a link to it. The LABEL element is merely a title for the list. Your example would therefore be non-conformant I guess as this is not really a title. Makes me wonder, if you're having trouble with it, how many others will... > Note that this label contains the exact same content as the paragraph in > your example did. Why is that text â??functionallyâ?? different when inside > a inside the navigation list? I hope I just explained that. To quote from the specification: # The label element is used to define a label for a list. The contents # of the label element represent the title of a list (or sublist). -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/ >Received on Monday, 30 May 2005 17:00:34 GMT |
|
||||||||||||||||