On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 2:55 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Feb 2013, Ian Yang wrote:
> >
> > There is one thing which makes me confused. You mentioned the is
> > "mainly serves as a styling hook." If what we need is just a styling
> > hook, w
role "main". Please
correct me if I'm wrong.
Kind Regards,
Ian Yang
W3C works. Note that in my personal opinion the Wikipedia page about
> W3C is outdated and very poor quality information.
>
> cheers
>
> Chaals
>
>
Hi Charles,
Thank you for providing resources. I will try to determine what topic
belongs to which group in the future.
Kind Regards
t has clearly defined the relationship between
and .
Any opinion will be appreciated. Thanks.
Kind Regards,
Ian Yang
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 1:06 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Feb 2013, Ian Yang wrote:
> >
> > I saw the SitePoint article "Introducing the New HTML5
> > Element<http://www.sitepoint.com/html5-main-element/>" yesterday. Does
> > that mean elem
/wiki/FAQ#What_is_the_WHATWG.3F
>
> Best regards
>
>
> 2013/2/14 Ian Yang
>
>> Hi Steve,
>>
>> Thanks. And sorry, but til now I still don't understand the differences
>> between whatwg and html wg. Could you please explain?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Ian
&
t; SteveF
>
>
> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 18:31:32 +0800
> > From: Ian Yang
> > To: whatwg
> > Subject: [whatwg] Is now an official HTML5 element?
> > Message-ID:
> >
> h1w0hRY61+LG=cebo-zuwy...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charse
element is not a sectioning
element. That means, in document outline, main content will form another
tree structure instead of appearing under the original website tree
structure. Can we have somebody advise on this? Is there a special
consideration to not making a sectioning element?
Sincerely,
Ian Yang
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> 2013-01-15 14:15, Ian Yang wrote:
>
> > The one came into my mind is blog comments, which are often
>
>> coded using untitled s. But personally I think that is wrong
>> because every sectioning element should h
one came into my mind is blog comments, which are often coded
using untitled s. But personally I think that is wrong because
every sectioning element should have a heading.
Regards,
Ian Yang
Hi Steve,
Thanks for the info. I had sent it to public-html-comme...@w3.org and had
added new info to Bugzilla.
Regards,
Ian Yang
On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 7:20 PM, Steve Faulkner wrote:
> Hi Ian,
> in regards to your post about how is defined:
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/P
of a blog post.
Any suggestion or advise will be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
Regards,
Ian Yang
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 2:08 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Nov 2012, Ian Yang wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 8:01 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> > > On Thu, 15 Nov 2012, Ian Yang wrote:
> > > >
> > > > That's a good idea. We really need a
/0221.html
>
Thanks Steve for explanation. Could you please suggest an appropriate
element for the wrapper of the content of a blog post?
Regards,
Ian Yang
On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 8:01 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:
>
> On Thu, 15 Nov 2012, Ian Yang wrote:
> >
> > That's a good idea. We really need an element to wrap all the s,
> > s, s, s, s ... etc of a blog post.
>
> That's called .
>
Thanks Hickson. Actua
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Ian Yang wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Tim Leverett wrote:
>
>> Personally, I'd rather see be more about marking up content in
>> general, such as in this example which is invalid given the curre
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Tim Leverett wrote:
> Personally, I'd rather see be more about marking up content in
> general, such as in this example which is invalid given the current state
> of the spec:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ...although this would probably fit bett
Hi Steve,
Thanks for your work, too :)
Regards,
Ian
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Steve Faulkner wrote:
> Hi Ian,
>
> Thanks for the detailed example, your reasoning is clear now and that
> gives me something to work with, and thanks for filing a bug!
>
> will respond on bug.
>
> regards
> S
at the same level in document outline.
A bug report for this issue has been filed on bugzilla.
Kind Regards,
Ian Yang
make the main content element a sectioning element, too?
Kind Regards,
Ian Yang
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 8:03 AM, Steve Faulkner wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have updated the spec [1] and would appreciate any feedback
> (including, but not limited to implementers).
>
> In the process
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 2:27 AM, Ian Hickson wrote
> On Mon, 16 Jul 2012, Ian Yang wrote:
> >
> > But your opinion does remind me of the element. That element is
> > a perfect example of introducing and using an element simply for its
> > rendering. Unlike and , it&
an become more clearer if the main content element is a
sectioning element. Please refer to a previous topic "Document outline and
the wrapper of the main content" (
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ig/2012JulSep/0157.html )
Kind Regards,
Ian Yang
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 4
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Ian Yang wrote:
>
> > Like above examples, the following is not well organized, and it's
>> > also a pain to read it:
>> >
>> >
>> > Lorem Ipsum
>> > Sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
>
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:56 AM, Leif Halvard Silli <
xn--mlform-...@xn--mlform-iua.no> wrote:
> Ian Yang on Thu, 19 Jul 2012 15:04:48 +0800, wrote:
>
> >> From previous discussions, some people had suggested possible markup for
> >> "life cycle" type
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 2:02 AM, Alex Bishop wrote:
> On 19/07/2012 08:04, Ian Yang wrote:
>
>> Since the *optional *use of in could solve many problems, may we
>>
>> have being valid in ?
>>
>
> Probably not, as it has similar drawbacks as the proposed e
be hard to style them.
Since the *optional *use of in could solve many problems, may we
have being valid in ?
Sincerely,
Ian Yang
2012/7/16 Jukka K. Korpela
> 2012-07-16 5:36, Ian Yang wrote:
>
>> Imo, means the order of the items is unimportant, not browsers can
>> render the items in any order.
>>
>
> But if the order is unimportant, there still _is_ an order. Being
> unordered would be
2012/7/16 Ian Hickson
> On Sat, 14 Jul 2012, Ian Yang wrote:
> > Recently I was involved in a project. One of its pages has a special
> > content which is like a "life cycle". There are several stages in the
> > cycle, each stage has a term followed by some text
2012/7/16 Leif H Silli
> Sat, 14 Jul 2012 23:53:32 +0800, from Ian Yang
>
>> Okay, it seems that one of the ideas I mentioned in my original email
>> needs to be revamped.
>>
>
>> I was saying that using general heading () and paragraph () loses
>&g
2012/7/16 Jukka K. Korpela
> 2012-07-15 17:40, Ian Yang wrote:
> > Throughout the article, I saw it mentioned "bullets" and "numbers"
> > frequently. However, that's just browsers' default rendering of and
> > .
>
> It's the only
2012/7/15 Jukka K. Korpela
> 2012-07-14 18:51, Ian Yang wrote:
>
> If is no more and no less ordered than ,
>> what's the purpose of its introduction?
>>
>
> The real purposes, in the dawn of HTML, were that and correspond
> to numbered and bulleted lists
When contents of a definition list are unordered, we could use:
And when contents of a definition list are ordered, we could use:
Sincerely,
Ian Yang
led
explanations or examples? Thanks.
Sincerely,
Ian Yang
ered, the itself being unable to do that
is, imho, disappointing.
Sincerely,
Ian Yang
markup more
meaningful
And we surely don't need and in because using is more
appropriate.
Sincerely,
Ian Yang
Meaningful and semantic HTML lover | Front-end developer
Hi Steve,
Thank you. I understand.
Regards,
Ian
2012/6/29 Steve Faulkner
> Hi Ian,
>
> ARIA fills the gap in HTML with role="main"
> http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/roles#main
>
> I agree that an explicit element would be nice, but the powers that be have
> rejected the idea.
>
> --
> with regar
e read question for me is: What is the problem of having the content at
> the same level of and (for example inside an )?
>
> Can't we treat everything inside an article which is not in or
> is the real "content"?
>
> Best regards
>
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 a
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
> If the content is a special section within the document you should use
> the element wh
,
Ian Yang
2012/6/29 Ashley Sheridan
>
>
> Ian Yang 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 hav
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
40 matches
Mail list logo
