[whatwg] article/section/details naming/definition problems
jimjjewett at gmail.com
Wed Sep 23 08:01:50 PDT 2009
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009, Erik Vorhes wrote:
>> <entry> (which has already been proposed) might more logically suit the
>> bill for standalone articles (in a blog or whatever) as well as
>> blog/forum comments. And since it's part of the Atom spec., there's some
>> precedent for defining its use.
> Renaming <article> to <entry> might make sense, I guess. It seems like
> it'd get more abuse, though. It sounds quite generic.
To me, the problem is that it has other meanings. I would assume it
was for some sort of input. Others might assume it was for some sort
"good place to start reading", sort of like a fragment ID but clearly
intended for even external links.
Would these be a problem in actual usage? It probably depends on how
quickly the name catches on with clear examples, so ... maybe.
More information about the whatwg