[html4all] Numbered headings (was HTMLWG)

Mon Nov 26 07:55:50 PST 2007

Hi Anne,

>> This would cause problems for authoring tool vendors
>> because the same element can be used in different contexts.
> I don't understand this comment
Say an authoring tool vendor wants to enforce the relationship between a section and a heading. On a toolbar button, the user presses the button labeled "Section" and the authoring tool creates:

<section>
	<h1></h1>
	<p></p>
</section>

Entire document would look like this:
<html>
	<body>
		<h1></h1>
		<section>
			<h1></h1>
			<p></p>
		</section>
	</body>
</html>

In the context of the section element, the authoring tool may draw a line around the h1 element (and section element) and not let users enter content before the h1 element. The authoring tool may also not let users delete the h1 element inside the section element.

In the context of the body element (outside the section element), h1 can be deleted, content can be entered before it and there is no line around it.

So in different contexts, the authoring tool needs to treat the same element (h1) in different ways. This creates problems for tool vendors.

>I think this would be the wrong list to make such requests.
My request was only an exercise to illustrate the points made in the previous post entitled "HTMLWG", where there was a list of possible reasons why people don't join the HTML WG (below). I felt that this exercise would illustrate points 3 and 4 in the post. Sorry if I confused anyone.

1. Some people are really turned off by the bullying tone taken by some WG members. Some feel that the HTML-WG culture is that of 'you are with us or you are against us'.

2. Some people strongly object/disagree with some of the design principles of X/HTML 5. Joining the HTML-WG is in effect endorsing the design principles of X/HTML 5.

3. Some people feel that the HTML-WG suffers from a 'not invented here' mindset, so prospective participants may not join because they feel their contributions will only be struck down.

4. Some people feel that the X/HTML 5 spec is written to meet the needs/wants of browser vendors. Prospective participants from other interest groups may feel that their needs/contributions will be marginalized.

Regards,
-Vlad
http://xhtml.com

-------- Original Message --------
From: Anne van Kesteren
Date: 2007-11-26 10:21 AM
> On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 16:05:18 +0100, Vlad Alexander  
> <vlad.alexander at xstandard.com> wrote:
>> 1. Using a numbered heading to represent a generic heading is going to  
>> be very confusing for users.
> 
> I suppose this could be true.
> 
> 
>> 2. Redefining the semantic meaning of h1 is not backwards compatible.
> 
> You can still use h1-h6 if you really need compatibility.
> 
> 
>> 3. This would cause problems for authoring tool vendors because the same  
>> element can be used in different contexts.
> 
> I don't understand this comment. h1-h6 meaning depends on their ancestor  
> element chain. This is new. But the elements in their ancestor chain that  
> can affect their meaning are also new.
> 
> 
>> 4. And more precisely, the X/HTML 5 spec does not in fact treat  
>> section/h1 as equivalent to the XHTML 2 section/h construct as  
>> illustrated by this example from X/HTML 5:
>>
>> <body>
>>  <h1>Apples</h1>
>>  <p>Apples are fruit.</p>
>>  <section>
>>   <h2>Taste</h2>
>>   <p>They taste lovely.</p>
>>   <section>
>>    <h3>Sweet</h3>
>>    <p>Red apples are sweeter than green ones.</p>
>>   </section>
>>  </section>
>>  <section>
>>   <h2>Color</h2>
>>   <p>Apples come in various colors.</p>
>>  </section>
>> </body>
> 
> I don't understand. HTML 5 is indeed incompatible with the XHTML 2 model  
> as it caters for h1-h6 as well and has a few more sectioning elements. I  
> don't see how this is problematic.
> 
> 
>> We therefore request that X/HTML 5 adopt the section/h construct from  
>> XHTML 2.
> 
> I think this would be the wrong list to make such requests.
> 
> 