[whatwg] <p> elements containing other block-level elements
ian at hixie.ch
Tue Apr 12 02:34:08 PDT 2005
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> Ian Hickson wrote:
> > > You missed <p><blockquote/></p>.
> > Oops, yep. Added.
> I could see the point with CODE versus PRE versus CODE as only child of
> PRE as they have different kind of semantics.
> But what is the reason for BLOCKQUOTE? Clearly, Q is for inline and you
> don't really need BLOCKQUOTE for that. (If you want to quote a table
> from some other source, perhaps, but then again, you could just alter
> the Q element its content model.)
Q is for quoting something that is part of a paragraph. BLOCKQUOTE is for
quoting something that contains paragraphs.
> > > The problem is that you mix inline with block-level. Unless UL is
> > > redefined to be inline level within P I don't think this is a good
> > > idea. I like the idea of having either inline or block-level
> > > content.
> > The spec now has block-level, structured inline-level, and strictly
> > inline-level concepts. I'm not overly fond of the names (better
> > suggestions welcome), but I hope it addresses your concerns.
> Mostly, except that they are underdefined at the moment. I assume that
> section is still being worked on?
The whole spec is being worked on. :-) However, I don't really see
anything underdefined about the block-level, structured inline-level, and
strictly inline-level concepts. What conformance criteria are we missing?
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg