[whatwg] <p> elements containing other block-level elements

[Ian Hickson]

On Sat, 9 Apr 2005, Matthew Thomas wrote:
> 
> That's why I said "acceptable", rather than "perfect". (Others 
> misunderstood what I meant too, so I should have used "readable". Access 
> via the DOM is something I personally care less about.)

Access via the DOM also affects styling.

Also, if UAs have to parse it in the old way, what's the point? It's not 
increasing the semantics, since the UAs have to parse it the old way.


> > Of b and d I prefer b. That, along with embedding MathML and other XML 
> > vocabularies, would be a reason to migrate to XML, if we consider that 
> > a good thing.
> 
> It will perhaps be a good thing once a future version of XML gives 
> authors the option of more graceful error-handling.

Quite.


> > > The content model for any block element allowed inside paragraphs 
> > > should be tweaked to not allow paragraphs when it's inside a 
> > > paragraph, because nested paragraphs don't make sense.
> > 
> > Agreed. (Including inside nested <tables> and <li>s, I assume?
> 
> Yes. (<li>s were the main element I was thinking of. There are lists 
> where each item is one or more paragraphs, lists that are completely 
> inside paragraphs, and lists that have nothing to do with paragraphs. 
> Those sets don't intersect.)

I agree.


> > But obviously excluding inside nested <blockquote>s.)
> 
> What? I can't think of any legitimate use case for that exception.

The whole point of a <_block_ quote> (as opposed to an inline <q>uote) is 
that it contains block-level elements, not inline content.

If I want to quote someone who said:

   Hello in one paragraph.

   World in the next.

...then I'm obviously going to need two paragraphs. Indeed these last 
eight lines are an example of this.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'