[whatwg] Dealing With <DFN> In Interactive Elements

[Eugene T.S. Wong]

> A UA could do that, but such implementation details do not belong in the  
> spec.  The spec should bascially only define the semantics and  
> functionality, but leave the implementation details to each individual  
> UA.

Lachlan & James, I think that I see what you are saying. That makes sense.  
Thanks.

On a slightly unrelated note, the spec says, "should be presented in such  
a way that the user can jump from the element to the first dfn element  
giving the defining instance of that term". I guess my concern is with the  
word "should". Shouldn't the word "should" be used no matter what  
situation? Shouldn't the UA present the content in a way that highlights  
both opportunities? If so, then why does it say, "and that has no  
interactive elements or dfn elements either as ancestors or descendants,  
and has no other elements as ancestors that are themselves matching these  
conditions, should be presented in such a way that the user can jump from  
the element to the first dfn element giving the defining instance of that  
term". In other words, what if it does have *those types* of ancestors or  
descendants?

-- 
Sincerely, and with thanks,
Eugene T.S. Wong