[whatwg] Tag Soup: Blocks-in-inlines

[Billy Wong]

On 1/26/06, Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt at lachy.id.au> wrote:
> Alexey Feldgendler wrote:
> > On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 08:34:38 +0600, Lachlan Hunt
> > <lachlan.hunt at lachy.id.au> wrote:
> >
> >> Semantically, it makes no sense at all to put a block level element
> >> within an inline element.
> >
> > Because CSS lets you redefine what's inline and what's block by means
> > of the display property, there sometimes is sense in having block
> > elements inside inline.
>
> Your argument is self defeating.  There is no need to put a block-level
> element inside an inline-level element, for the simple fact that CSS
> does let you style any element as 'inline' or 'block'.  If you do have a
> legitimate reason for it, please present a semantic/non-presentational
> use-case.
>
If "no need" to do something equals "no sense" to do it, then there is
"no sense" for us to discuss any new tags or attributes which can be
replaced by script.  My original argument is "What makes inline-level
element infeasible to contain block-level elements"  The key word is
"infeasible".  "Not conforming to HTML4" or "no need to do that" are
not good arguments.
When somebody want a hyperlink work for one or more block(s) including
the inside space and border, it make sense to most to put <a
href=""><div>...</div></a> Currently, in order to do the same thing
and remain "conformable", people need to do pointless hack like <div
onclick=""><a href="">...</a></div>  I so wish someone can tell me
(and others) a legitimate reason that we should not "put a block-level
element inside an inline-level element", besides simply "this is the
Rule"