On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Markus Ernst <derer...@gmx.ch> wrote:
> Am 28.02.2011 19:56 schrieb Tab Atkins Jr.: > > >> I believe you're arguing that the "wrapper" semantic, being similarly >> ubiquitous, thus needs its own new element as well. What you're >> missing is that the "wrapper" semantic is precisely what<div> already >> expresses. >> > > I do understand usuario's <wrapper> proposal slightly different from <div>: > Section 4.5.13 of the spec generally states that the <div> element is > conveying structure, but not semantics. > > Usuario's <wrapper> is not structural, but purely presentational. It should > actually not be there at all from an HTML point of view, but is necessary > for CSS reasons. > Isn't that what the section::outside{ ... } is for? Presentational pseudo elements in CSS? http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-content/#wrapping Granted it's not available as far as I know... but it seems like it meets usario's needs. - Jordan > > I agree with Bjartur Thorlacius' point that it makes more sense to enhance > CSS the way that presentational markup gets totally obsolete in the future - > but the idea of an element that is explicitly non-structural does not look > that odd to me. > -- Jordan Dobson • Designer / Developer • 425-444-8014 • About.Me/JordanDobson<http://about.me/jordandobson>