Elliotte Harold wrote:
Not much. <section class="article"> is perfectly fine. My mind just happened to be in another spec at the moment where there were roles and not classes, so I happened to mention role where I probanly should have said class.
IMHO, predefined classes do not belong in HTML5. The class attribute is already defined as user-defined, and it should remain that way to avoid conflicts.
It's not really a question of whether article makes sense. The question is whether it makes *enough* sense. There are arguments for it, but they're very weak. I do not see a community crying out for this. I don't think it's going to help anybody all that much, and I'm afraid it's going to end up like address: a poorly understood, rarely used element that's misused more often than it's used properly.
<address> is a poorly understood, rarely-used element because it's poorly-named. It represents the intersection of <contactinfo> and <attribution>, which is neither particularly useful nor particularly related to its name.
I suspect I could ask the same question of a few other elements as well. time and meter come to mind. They at least don't have any obvious equivalents already in the spec, and are obvious enough they perhaps won't be frequently misused; but do authors actually need these? Will they use them?
The meter concept is widely used already (think reviews and ratings). As long as <meter> provides the necessary stylistic flexibility, it should be a useful addition to HTML5. If it doesn't, though, or if it makes styling more difficult than current methods, then it won't be used much. Dates are very often marked-up specially.[1] There's even a microformat design pattern developed to embed ISO representations of the date without compromising its readability: http://microformats.org/wiki/datetime-design-pattern The <time> element is much more appropriate for this than <abbr>. [1] http://code.google.com/webstats/2005-12/classes.html ~fantasai
