[whatwg] Significant inline content vs. attributes and sectional elements
ian at hixie.ch
Mon Dec 10 20:54:27 PST 2007
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006, Sander Tekelenburg wrote:
> At 22:08 +0000 UTC, on 2006-03-09, Ian Hickson wrote:
> > * It should be possible for scripts to add content to placeholder
> > elements without those placeholder elements being non-conformant.
> > This is a very useful programming idiom, not least of which because
> > adding content to an existing element (whether attributes or child
> > nodes) is a lot easier than adding the element in the first place.
> Wouldn't a <placeholder> element be more appropriate then?
How would that work?
> > * It should be possible to have a group of pages that have a similar
> > structure, with elements annotated as necessary. For example, a menu
> > list could be the same on each page, but with the currently loaded
> > page simply not having the "href" attribute on its link, or some such.
> I won't claim there might not be valid cases, but this seems like a bad
> example to me. If something is not a link it should not be marked-up as
> such. How useful is it to the user to provide a hyperlink that points
Well, we decide what "markup for a link" consists of. If we say it is just
an <a> element with an href="" attribute, then an <a> element without an
href="" attribute isn't marked up as a link.
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg