[whatwg] [html5] DI element

[Matthew Raymond]

Mikko Rantalainen wrote:
> How about the following example (doesn't nicely fit the western document 
> authoring style, but anyway):
> 
> 	HEADING1
> 
> 	This is a paragraph related to heading 1.
> 
> 	This is a paragraph related to heading 1.
> 
> 		HEADING 1.1
> 
> 		This is a paragraph related to heading 1.1.
> 
> 		This is a paragraph related to heading 1.1.
> 
> 	This is a paragraph related to heading 1.
> 
> 	This is a paragraph related to heading 1.
> 
> (text indented to show the logical structure)
> 
> SECTION element is able to describe structures like this, H1-H6 isn't.

    Cool. I hadn't really thought about this situation. Let's see if I 
can fit it into my previous <section>/<h> proposal:

| <section>
|   <h>HEADING1</h>
|   <p>This is a paragraph related to heading 1.</p>
|   <p>This is a paragraph related to heading 1.</p>
|   <section>
|     <h>HEADING 1.1</h>
|     <p>This is a paragraph related to heading 1.1.</p>
|     <p>This is a paragraph related to heading 1.1.</p>
|   </section>
|   <p>This is a paragraph related to heading 1.</p>
|   <p>This is a paragraph related to heading 1.</p>
| </section>

    Yeah, that should work.

> I support including both SECTION and DI. But if SECTION isn't required, 
> I cannot see why DI should be required.

    Apples and oranges. For instance, why couldn't unordered or ordered 
lists within a definition list be used?

| <dl>
|   <dt>CSS</dt>
|   <dd>
|    <ol>
|     <li>Cascading Style Sheets</li>
|     <li>Content Scrambling System</li>
|    </ol>
|   </dd>
|   <dt>etc</dt>
|   <dd>et cetera</dd>
| </dl>

    So, unless there's a use case I haven't anticipated, the question 
becomes whether or not we need the additional element to simplify the 
markup or to supply additional semantics.