On Tue, 14 Dec 2010 17:41:15 -0000, Richard Summers
<richard.summ...@bbc.co.uk> wrote:
Using <article> elements within other <article> elements feels a bit like
we'd just be replacing <div> for <article>, it seems to remove some of
the
logical distinction between different types of content.
As the use-case would potentially be huge (previously stated impact to
Blogs/Message Boards/News outlets), is there any more mileage in perhaps
using a <feedback> (or similar) element, as suggested by Bruce Hyslop?
A <feedback>,or similar, (<response>?) element would distinguish content
as
a response to an article, and therefore denote that it serves a different
purpose to the main content in the <article> element.
I'm not sure such gradations of distinction are necessary or desirable.
A comment is "a self-contained composition in a document, page,
application, or site and that is, in principle, independently
distributable or reusable", as is an article that is commented on. As is a
news item, a blog post,a book on Amazon.com, a video on YouTube, or a
rakish gold sovereign ring on Argos.co.uk. We don't need <news>,
<blogpost>, <book>, <video-entry> or <sovereign> - so do we really need
<feedback> or <response>?
bruce
