seems inappropriate since that should, I believe, be a single piece of content. A

also seems inappropriate in itself, unless its part of an even larger context. It could just be a

, or nothing at all, but I feel like there is some semantic value being missed. So then, why is there no element? I would be super curious to hear everyone's thoughts on this. -- Andrew Croce andrew.croce at gmail.com andrewcroce.com 732.995.0590 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From binderbound at hotmail.com Wed Dec 24 00:26:27 2014 From: binderbound at hotmail.com (Not Telling) Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 19:26:27 +1100 Subject: [html5] Appropriate markup for index documents In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: Misspelt help From: binderbound at hotmail.com To: andrew.croce at gmail.com CC: hep at whatwg.org Subject: RE: [html5] Appropriate markup for index documents Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 19:23:42 +1100 Hi Andrew I believe a description list

to declare the term being defined and definition description

which describes the term it follows. The page you describe would be the

and a description od the page, or another sub-index for that term would fit under

. Nesting gives you some degree of "sectioning" but not exactly in the way you want, I expect. Could you give a specific example of the usage you are talking about? Use invented elements if you want - I'm just unsure exactly what you mean. Luke From: andrew.croce at gmail.com Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 11:14:37 -0500 To: help at whatwg.org Subject: [html5] Appropriate markup for index documents I have been wondering about this for a while now, and I've finally gotten around to writing up the question: What is the appropriate semantic container element (if any) for an index document? It seems to me that there is a gap in the semantic options for marking up index, or list, pages. Now, to be clear I realize there are list elements, but these are strictly for marking up the specific set of listed items. However, a list may have a larger context, which I am calling an index. Like an article, an index might have a header and footer, and should probably contain a

seems inappropriate since that should, I believe, be a single piece of content. A

also seems inappropriate in itself, unless its part of an even larger context. It could just be a

Catalog of Items

A description of the catalog...

Catalogued item #1
Catalogued item #2
Catalogued item #3

I suppose you could possibly argue that a

might satisfy the semantics, though it wouldn?t really be a definition LIST, just sort of a highly abstracted definition? a stretch, I think. Also, its not clear how sectioning algorithms would handle the scope of a headings, for instance, in the context of a

Catalog of Items A description of the catalog... {some filters, perhaps}

Catalogued item #1
Catalogued item #2
Catalogued item #3

Andrew > On Dec 24, 2014, at 3:26 AM, Not Telling wrote: > > Misspelt help > > From: binderbound at hotmail.com > To: andrew.croce at gmail.com > CC: hep at whatwg.org > Subject: RE: [html5] Appropriate markup for index documents > Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 19:23:42 +1100 > > Hi Andrew > I believe a description list

to declare the term being defined and definition description

which describes the term it follows. The page you describe would be the

and a description od the page, or another sub-index for that term would fit under

. Nesting gives you some degree of "sectioning" but not exactly in the way you want, I expect. Could you give a specific example of the usage you are talking about? Use invented elements if you want - I'm just unsure exactly what you mean. > > Luke > > From: andrew.croce at gmail.com > Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 11:14:37 -0500 > To: help at whatwg.org > Subject: [html5] Appropriate markup for index documents > > I have been wondering about this for a while now, and I've finally gotten around to writing up the question: > > What is the appropriate semantic container element (if any) for an index document? > > It seems to me that there is a gap in the semantic options for marking up index, or list, pages. Now, to be clear I realize there are list elements, but these are strictly for marking up the specific set of listed items. However, a list may have a larger context, which I am calling an index. > > Like an article, an index might have a header and footer, and should probably contain a

seems inappropriate since that should, I believe, be a single piece of content. A

also seems inappropriate in itself, unless its part of an even larger context. It could just be a

, or nothing at all, but I feel like there is some semantic value being missed. > > So then, why is there no element? I would be super curious to hear everyone's thoughts on this. > > -- > Andrew Croce > andrew.croce at gmail.com > andrewcroce.com > 732.995.0590 > > _______________________________________________ Help mailing list Help at lists.whatwg.org http://lists.whatwg.org/listinfo.cgi/help-whatwg.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From yrocsand at gmail.com Wed Dec 24 14:25:34 2014 From: yrocsand at gmail.com (Cory Sand) Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 17:25:34 -0500 Subject: [html5] Appropriate markup for index documents In-Reply-To: References:

Message-ID: On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Not Telling wrote: > HTML is becoming increasingly focused on structure [...] There are > examples in HTML where content is described, such as Blockquote, but these > are mostly left behind from HTML 4 > luke > Just curious, what is your basis for this conclusion? > > ------------------------------ > Subject: Re: [html5] Appropriate markup for index documents > From: andrew.croce at gmail.com > Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 12:07:48 -0500 > CC: help at whatwg.org > To: binderbound at hotmail.com > > So what I was considering is something like a catalog? > > >

Catalog of Items

A description of the catalog...

> > >

Catalogued item #1
Catalogued item #2
Catalogued item #3

> > > > > I suppose you could possibly argue that a

might satisfy the > semantics, though it wouldn?t really be a definition LIST, just sort of a > highly abstracted definition? a stretch, I think. Also, its not clear how > sectioning algorithms would handle the scope of a headings, for instance, > in the context of a

. > >

> > Catalog of Items > A description of the catalog... > > {some filters, perhaps} >

Catalogued item #1
Catalogued item #2
Catalogued item #3

> > Andrew > > On Dec 24, 2014, at 3:26 AM, Not Telling wrote: > > Misspelt help > > ------------------------------ > From: binderbound at hotmail.com > To: andrew.croce at gmail.com > CC: hep at whatwg.org > Subject: RE: [html5] Appropriate markup for index documents > Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 19:23:42 +1100 > > Hi Andrew > I believe a description list

to declare the term being defined and definition > description

which describes the term it follows. The page you describe > would be the

and a description od the page, or another sub-index for > that term would fit under

. Nesting gives you some degree of > "sectioning" but not exactly in the way you want, I expect. Could you give > a specific example of the usage you are talking about? Use invented > elements if you want - I'm just unsure exactly what you mean. > > Luke > > ------------------------------ > From: andrew.croce at gmail.com > Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 11:14:37 -0500 > To: help at whatwg.org > Subject: [html5] Appropriate markup for index documents > > I have been wondering about this for a while now, and I've finally gotten > around to writing up the question: > > What is the appropriate semantic container element (if any) for an index > document? > > It seems to me that there is a gap in the semantic options for marking up > index, or list, pages. Now, to be clear I realize there are list elements, > but these are strictly for marking up the specific set of listed items. > However, a list may have a larger context, which I am calling an index. > > Like an article, an index might have a header and footer, and should > probably contain a

> seems inappropriate since that should, I believe, be a single piece of > content. A

also seems inappropriate in itself, unless its part of > an even larger context. It could just be a

, or nothing at all, but I > feel like there is some semantic value being missed. > > So then, why is there no element? I would be super curious to hear > everyone's thoughts on this. > > -- > Andrew Croce > andrew.croce at gmail.com > andrewcroce.com > 732.995.0590 > > _______________________________________________ Help mailing list > Help at lists.whatwg.orghttp://lists.whatwg.org/listinfo.cgi/help-whatwg.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > Help mailing list > Help at lists.whatwg.org > http://lists.whatwg.org/listinfo.cgi/help-whatwg.org > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From webmaster at tsmchughs.com Fri Dec 26 13:21:01 2014 From: webmaster at tsmchughs.com (Brian Tremblay) Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2014 13:21:01 -0800 Subject: [html5] Appropriate markup for index documents In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <549DD13D.3030006@tsmchughs.com> On 12/23/14 8:14 AM, Andrew Croce wrote: > > It seems to me that there is a gap in the semantic options for marking > up index, or list, pages. Now, to be clear I realize there are list > elements, but these are strictly for marking up the specific set of > listed items. However, a list may have a larger context, which I am > calling an index. I'm not sure what you want. There is no specific element for different kinds of pages; since there are virtually unlimited kinds of pages, html would need unlimited different elements to contain them. There is microdata, which is perhaps what you want: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/microdata.html There is a collection of schema: http://schema.org/ All of them are supposedly used by Google et. al., but on most types there seems to be no difference in how clients treat them. The specific schema you want is probably http://schema.org/CollectionPage [rant:] But I honestly don't see the point. It's parent type is http://schema.org/WebPage and what on earth is the point of that? Are we supposed to use microdata to tell search engines that our webpage is a webpage? What the #$@# else would it be? If you feel the need to add pointless semantics, than use the CollectionPage schema. But I wouldn't bother. [rant over] > Like an article, an index might have a header and footer, and should > probably contain a

seems inappropriate since that should, I believe, be a single > piece of content. A

also seems inappropriate in itself, unless > its part of an even larger context. I don't see why you discount section and article. They are perfectly good elements. You can put a nav element if it's appropriate, or break it up into sections if that's appropriate.

list of foo bar pages

foo

foo 1
foo 2
etc.

bar

bar 1
bar 2
etc.

If your list, the index of pages, is the sole piece of content on a page, than you don't need a container element.

list of foo bar pages

-- Brian Tremblay From andrew.croce at gmail.com Sat Dec 27 09:30:33 2014 From: andrew.croce at gmail.com (Andrew Croce) Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2014 12:30:33 -0500 Subject: [html5] Appropriate markup for index documents In-Reply-To: <549DD13D.3030006@tsmchughs.com> References: <549DD13D.3030006@tsmchughs.com> Message-ID: Wow, love the vitriol! My question was mainly academic in nature, and I was hoping to hear some opinions about a matter that has had me curious. I tend to agree with you in practice, as I have been inclined not to wedge in unnecessary or inappropriate semantics, and (as you said so colorfully) wouldn't even bother with a microdata schema in such an obvious page structure. Perhaps "page" was the wrong word to use anyway, as my question applies equally to index-like element of a document at any depth. To restate the question in a different way: since we have semantics for an article, and break that into headings and sections, etc., why wouldn't it be appropriate to have a higher level element that describes a meaningful grouping of articles? I realize you could make an argument asking where it ends: do we also want elements for museums and kitchen utensils? But I think an index is a broad enough concept with both structural and semantic implications, that it might deserve (at least hypothetical) consideration as an HTML element. After all, isn't the default page that a server serves called "index"? Thank you all for listening, and sharing your comments. Andrew On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 4:21 PM, Brian Tremblay wrote: > On 12/23/14 8:14 AM, Andrew Croce wrote: > >> >> It seems to me that there is a gap in the semantic options for marking >> up index, or list, pages. Now, to be clear I realize there are list >> elements, but these are strictly for marking up the specific set of >> listed items. However, a list may have a larger context, which I am >> calling an index. >> > > I'm not sure what you want. There is no specific element for different > kinds of pages; since there are virtually unlimited kinds of pages, html > would need unlimited different elements to contain them. There is > microdata, which is perhaps what you want: > > https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/microdata.html > > There is a collection of schema: > > http://schema.org/ > > All of them are supposedly used by Google et. al., but on most types there > seems to be no difference in how clients treat them. > > The specific schema you want is probably > > http://schema.org/CollectionPage > > > [rant:] > > But I honestly don't see the point. It's parent type is > > http://schema.org/WebPage > > and what on earth is the point of that? Are we supposed to use microdata > to tell search engines that our webpage is a webpage? What the #$@# else > would it be? > > If you feel the need to add pointless semantics, than use the > CollectionPage schema. But I wouldn't bother. > > [rant over] > > > Like an article, an index might have a header and footer, and should >> probably contain a

seems inappropriate since that should, I believe, be a single >> piece of content. A

also seems inappropriate in itself, unless >> its part of an even larger context. >> > > I don't see why you discount section and article. They are perfectly good > elements. You can put a nav element if it's appropriate, or break it up > into sections if that's appropriate. > > > >

list of foo bar pages

> >

foo

foo 1
foo 2
etc.

> >

bar

bar 1
bar 2
etc.

> >

> > > > > If your list, the index of pages, is the sole piece of content on a page, > than you don't need a container element. > > > >

list of foo bar pages

foo 1
foo 2
bar 1
bar 2
etc.

> > > > -- > Brian Tremblay > > _______________________________________________ > Help mailing list > Help at lists.whatwg.org > http://lists.whatwg.org/listinfo.cgi/help-whatwg.org > -- Andrew Croce andrew.croce at gmail.com andrewcroce.com 732.995.0590 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From webmaster at tsmchughs.com Sat Dec 27 11:09:22 2014 From: webmaster at tsmchughs.com (Brian Tremblay) Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2014 11:09:22 -0800 Subject: [html5] Appropriate markup for index documents In-Reply-To: References: <549DD13D.3030006@tsmchughs.com> Message-ID: <549F03E2.1050004@tsmchughs.com> On 12/27/14 9:30 AM, Andrew Croce wrote: >> >> On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 4:21 PM, Brian Tremblay wrote: >> >>> On 12/23/14 8:14 AM, Andrew Croce wrote: >>> >>> It seems to me that there is a gap in the semantic options for >>> marking up index, or list, pages. Now, to be clear I realize >>> there are list elements, but these are strictly for marking up >>> the specific set of listed items. However, a list may have a >>> larger context, which I am calling an index. >> >> I'm not sure what you want. There is no specific element for >> different kinds of pages > > My question was mainly academic in nature On matters of html and the web, academic questions are generally moot. html versions that were widely adopted were generally attempts to get the language to match up with what browsers were already doing. It was, unfortunately imho, a capitulation to Netscape and MS. Consider html 3.2 and html 4.01 (in particular, the loose flavor of 4.01). By contrast, the academic stuff eg., html 3.0, xhtml 2.0, were abandoned. > Perhaps "page" was the wrong word to use anyway, as my question > applies equally to index-like element of a document at any depth. I don't really know what you have in mind here. > To restate the question in a different way: since we have semantics > for an article, and break that into headings and sections, etc. article is just a section that can be understood alone. And section is just a part of a document. > why wouldn't it be appropriate to have a higher level element that > describes a meaningful grouping of articles?

foo

foo fob fog fon fol

bar

bar baz bat bal

dor

dor don doo dop

> I think an index is a broad enough concept with both structural and > semantic implications, that it might deserve (at least hypothetical) > consideration as an HTML element. After all, isn't the default page > that a server serves called "index"? Defaults on the web are often due to what made sense in a unix-y environment when the web was born. If a url corresponded to a directory on the server, it made sense to show a list of pages located in that directory. If you wanted to build your own such list, you would then call it "index.html". A few servers used "default.html" instead, which, in hind sight, would have been preferable, since what you want is the page that is shown by default if a url corresponds to a directory, but not to any specific document in that directory. most "index.html" pages do not contain an index. -- Brian Tremblay From nylsiva at gmail.com Mon Dec 29 02:52:12 2014 From: nylsiva at gmail.com (Siva Kumar) Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2014 16:22:12 +0530 Subject: [html5] CSS for File Upload Button Message-ID: Hi i am trying to create upload button using HTML like i need to create customized browse button with my own text and colors *with the only help of CSS*. For this i have some query's please clarify me the below points 1. like other buttons why i cant customize this button easily. is there any reason behind that. 2. why all browser are not having unique format( some have textbox then browse button , some have browse button only). 3. is there any idea to improve this in future. Thanks in Advance *Thanks & Regards,* M.Sivakkumar M.B.A.,M.C.A., UI Developer -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From binderbound at hotmail.com Wed Dec 24 14:02:11 2014 From: binderbound at hotmail.com (Not Telling) Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2014 09:02:11 +1100 Subject: [html5] Appropriate markup for index documents In-Reply-To: References: <, <>> , Message-ID: Ahh, I see Under the first example you gave, it may be appropriate to use a main element, as the index is the prime focus of the page. I've thought about this for a bit, and I'm not sure it is really necessary to semantically declare that you are giving us an index or contents page, in a similar way to how it isn't necessary for someone to declare certain sections as a reference list/bibliography or other sections as background decoration. HTML is becoming increasingly focused on structure, but in your case, knowing that you ate giving us an index or catalog does nothing to assist structure - rather you are describing the content in your structure. There are examples in HTML where content is described, such as Blockquote, but these are mostly left behind from HTML 4 luke Subject: Re: [html5] Appropriate markup for index documents From: andrew.croce at gmail.com Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 12:07:48 -0500 CC: help at whatwg.org To: binderbound at hotmail.com So what I was considering is something like a catalog?

Catalog of Items

A description of the catalog...

Catalogued item #1
Catalogued item #2
Catalogued item #3

I suppose you could possibly argue that a

Catalog of Items A description of the catalog... {some filters, perhaps}

Catalogued item #1
Catalogued item #2
Catalogued item #3

Andrew On Dec 24, 2014, at 3:26 AM, Not Telling wrote:Misspelt help From: binderbound at hotmail.com To: andrew.croce at gmail.com CC: hep at whatwg.org Subject: RE: [html5] Appropriate markup for index documents Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 19:23:42 +1100 Hi Andrew I believe a description list

to declare the term being defined and definition description

which describes the term it follows. The page you describe would be the

and a description od the page, or another sub-index for that term would fit under

seems inappropriate since that should, I believe, be a single piece of content. A

also seems inappropriate in itself, unless its part of an even larger context. It could just be a

, or nothing at all, but I feel like there is some semantic value being missed. So then, why is there no element? I would be super curious to hear everyone's thoughts on this. -- Andrew Croce andrew.croce at gmail.com andrewcroce.com 732.995.0590 _______________________________________________ Help mailing list Help at lists.whatwg.orghttp://lists.whatwg.org/listinfo.cgi/help-whatwg.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From binderbound at hotmail.com Wed Dec 24 22:56:20 2014 From: binderbound at hotmail.com (Not Telling) Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2014 17:56:20 +1100 Subject: [html5] Appropriate markup for index documents In-Reply-To: References: , , , , Message-ID: Do you mean that HTML is becoming more structure driven? WHATWG standard section 3.4.4.2 "Kinds of content" talks about the different types of content - metadata, sectioning, flow, heading, phrasing, embedded and interactive. If elements describe their content rather than structure, this model no longer makes sense. An index can be a section, perhaps, but as an index describing the document's relationship to other documents, why not metadata? If the index is the whole page or significant part that might have sections, why not a sectioning route? I'm being a bit silly with those examples, but even so, there is some room for argument there. Describing content is not the focus of the document outline. Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 17:25:34 -0500 Subject: Re: [html5] Appropriate markup for index documents From: yrocsand at gmail.com To: binderbound at hotmail.com CC: andrew.croce at gmail.com; help at whatwg.org On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Not Telling wrote: HTML is becoming increasingly focused on structure [...] There are examples in HTML where content is described, such as Blockquote, but these are mostly left behind from HTML 4 luke Just curious, what is your basis for this conclusion? Subject: Re: [html5] Appropriate markup for index documents From: andrew.croce at gmail.com Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 12:07:48 -0500 CC: help at whatwg.org To: binderbound at hotmail.com So what I was considering is something like a catalog?

Catalog of Items

A description of the catalog...

Catalogued item #1
Catalogued item #2
Catalogued item #3

I suppose you could possibly argue that a

Catalog of Items A description of the catalog... {some filters, perhaps}

Catalogued item #1
Catalogued item #2
Catalogued item #3

Andrew On Dec 24, 2014, at 3:26 AM, Not Telling wrote: Misspelt help From: binderbound at hotmail.com To: andrew.croce at gmail.com CC: hep at whatwg.org Subject: RE: [html5] Appropriate markup for index documents Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 19:23:42 +1100 Hi Andrew I believe a description list

to declare the term being defined and definition description

which describes the term it follows. The page you describe would be the

and a description od the page, or another sub-index for that term would fit under

seems inappropriate since that should, I believe, be a single piece of content. A

also seems inappropriate in itself, unless its part of an even larger context. It could just be a