[whatwg] The blockquote element spec vs common quoting practices

Bjartur Thorlacius svartman95 at gmail.com
Thu Jul 14 05:58:58 PDT 2011

Þann fim 14.júl 2011 09:38, skrifaði Oli Studholme:
> in graphic design a footer contains supplementary information about
> the content it follows. the spec initially disallowed ‘fat footers’,
> but the naming and common usage would have led to people using them
> for fat footers regardless of the spec. they still contain
> supplementary information about their sectioning element or sectioning
> root. This semantic connection seems stronger to me than one based on
> arbitrary size
Would it not be less confusing to forbid 'fat footers' and rename footer 
-> credit?

More information about the whatwg mailing list