[whatwg] "content" element, which we need in our documents

[Cameron Jones]

more organized for who? the author or the consumer?

this is author aesthetics.

On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Ian Yang <ian.html at gmail.com> wrote:
> By analyzing the example in HTML5 spec, wrapping all content elements can
> make the structure of the document become more organized. After all,
> content elements all being at the same level of <header> and <footer> is
> unreasonable, and sometimes looks messy, especially when there are many
> different kinds of content elements (p, figure, pre, a, table, ...... etc).
>
> 2012/6/29 Aurelio De Rosa <aurelioderosa at gmail.com>
>
>> I agree with Ian about the use of <article> and <section>, the
>> specifications are really clear on those elements. The are used to wrap an
>> entire entry, not the "content" (in the meaning Ian stated).
>>
>> The read question for me is: What is the problem of having the content at
>> the same level of <header> and <footer> (for example inside an <article>)?
>>
>> Can't we treat everything inside an article which is not in <header> or
>> <footer> is the real "content"?
>>
>> Best regards
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Ian Yang <ian.html at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> As described in whatwg specs, a <section>, in this context, is a thematic
>>> grouping of content, typically with a heading.
>>>
>>> As for a <article>, which usually contains its own <header> and <footer>,
>>> is used to form an independent content like blog entry, comment, or
>>> application.
>>>
>>> Both section and article elements are not the candidate for containing a
>>> website or a blog entry's main content. That obviously is the reason that
>>> the example of the nav in HTML5 spec doesn't use them.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Ian Yang
>>>
>>> 2012/6/29 Cameron Jones <cmhjones at gmail.com>
>>>
>>> > If the content is a special section within the document you should use
>>> > the <section> element which has semantic meaning over <div>.
>>> > Alternatively you could use <article> if it's distinct and
>>> > self-contained. These two elements serve to disambiguate the abstract
>>> > idea of content into something with semantic meaning which can be
>>> > instrumented by document consumers.
>>> >
>>> > cam
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Ashley Sheridan
>>> > <ash at ashleysheridan.co.uk> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > Ian Yang <ian.html at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > >>Hi editors in chief and everyone else,
>>> > >>
>>> > >>How have you been recently?
>>> > >>
>>> > >>As many of you may have been aware that there is an important
>>> > >>sectioning
>>> > >>element we have been short of for a long time: the "content" element.
>>> > >>
>>> > >>Remember how we sectioned our documents in those old days? It's the
>>> > >>meaningless <div>s. We used them and added id="header", id="content",
>>> > >>id="sidebar", and id="footer" to them.
>>> > >>
>>> > >>After HTML5 came out, we started to have new and semantic elements
>>> like
>>> > >>"header", "aside", and "footer" to improve our documents.
>>> > >>
>>> > >>However, today, we are still using the meaningless <div> for our
>>> > >>content.
>>> > >>
>>> > >>The main content forms an important region. And we often wrap it with
>>> > >>an
>>> > >>element. By doing so, we distinguish the region from the header and
>>> the
>>> > >>footer, and also prevent all of its child elements (block level or
>>> > >>inline
>>> > >>level) being incorrectly at the same level as the header and the
>>> > >>footer.
>>> > >>
>>> > >>In the first example of the intro section of the nav element in HTML5
>>> > >>Spec
>>> > >>( http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/single-page.html#the-nav-element )
>>> (the
>>> > >>page
>>> > >>takes a while to be fully loaded), the bottom note states: "Notice the
>>> > >>div
>>> > >>elements being used to wrap all the contents of the page other than
>>> the
>>> > >>header and footer, and all the contents of the blog entry other than
>>> > >>its
>>> > >>header and footer."
>>> > >>
>>> > >>This example mentioned above is a typical situation that we need an
>>> > >>element
>>> > >>for the main content. So instead of keep wrapping our contents with
>>> the
>>> > >>meaningless <div>, why not let the "content" element join HTML5?
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> > >>Sincerely,
>>> > >>Ian Yang
>>> > >>Meaningful and semantic HTML lover  |  Front-end developer
>>> > >
>>> > > I am pretty sure this was discussed a few months back and the answer
>>> was
>>> > that everything is content, so no need for a content element. The
>>> <header>
>>> > and <footer> just mark up areas of that content with special meaning,
>>> but
>>> > its still all the main content.
>>> > >
>>> > > Thanks,
>>> > > Ash
>>> > > http://ashleysheridan.co.uk
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Aurelio De Rosa
>> email: aurelioderosa at gmail.com
>> email:  a.derosa at audero.it
>> website: www.audero.it
>> user group: ug.audero.it
>>
>>