On Thu, 26 Jan 2012 21:43:07 -, Matthew Wilcox
wrote:
Obviously this is not right - perhaps I'm not understanding your use
case? Why would you want to specify an author as an attribute on the
element?
Not necessarily as an attribute, I would prefer an element.
What is wrong with:
C
Obviously this is not right - perhaps I'm not understanding your use case?
Why would you want to specify an author as an attribute on the element?
What is wrong with:
Content
Written by: Person
Any time you do this the information will have been pulled through a CMS,
so it's trivial to have a
Þann fim 26.jan 2012 14:48, skrifaði Matthew Wilcox:
What's wrong with using a class on the to identify the author
stylistically? It's already identified semantically by having their name
in the itself, right (presumably in a too)?
As in
The situation only gets worse when you consider the di
What's wrong with using a class on the to identify the author
stylistically? It's already identified semantically by having their name in
the itself, right (presumably in a too)?
On 26 January 2012 13:57, Bjartur Thorlacius wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 22:26:31 -, Ian Hickson wrote:
>
>>
On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 22:26:31 -, Ian Hickson wrote:
Actually, they are remarkably similar. I think it's anachronistic to
consider that the utterances of the site owner are in some way distinct
from the utterances of the site readers.
While I do agree with you (for a change), identifying aut
On Sun, 4 Sep 2011, Shaun Moss wrote:
>
> I've joined this list to put forward the argument that there should be
> elements for and included in the HTML5 spec.
We already have an element for comments and other self-contained document
modules, namely, . The spec in fact specifically calls out
