Re: [whatwg] use of article to markup comments
Bruce Lawson bru...@opera.com schrieb am Sat, 26 Jan 2013 13:30:18 -: In short, why should the spec suggest any specific method of marking up comments? As someone who is interested in semantics and tired of scraping content and applying scrappy heuristics: If it is clear that an article within an article represents a comments one can easily: * programmatically find article comments in HTML * write interoperable stylesheets for comments, using the selector “article article” * use HTML fragments in a document store for content management (I wrote a blog software with a git backend yesterday and plan to add this feature) Without having one interoperable way all that becomes a lot harder. -- Nils Dagsson Moskopp // erlehmann http://dieweltistgarnichtso.net
Re: [whatwg] use of article to markup comments
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 12:19 AM, Nils Dagsson Moskopp n...@dieweltistgarnichtso.net wrote: Bruce Lawson bru...@opera.com schrieb am Sat, 26 Jan 2013 13:30:18 -: In short, why should the spec suggest any specific method of marking up comments? As someone who is interested in semantics and tired of scraping content and applying scrappy heuristics: If it is clear that an article within an article represents a comments one can easily: article in article could be a comment. Or it could be something else entirely. Your heuristic may work in many cases, but certainly not in all. If we really wanted to be sure where to find the semantic concept of a comment, we should introduce a meaningful element for it such as comment. Silvia.
Re: [whatwg] use of article to markup comments
Brucel wrote: On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 10:56:10 -, Steve Faulkner faulkner.st...@gmail.com wrote: Lists are appropriate for indicating nested tree structures. The use of lists to markup comments is a common mark up pattern used in blogging software such as wordpress. The code verbosity is not dissimilar to the use of article, less so even option end /li tags are omitted. Besides comments are generated code not hand authored so I don't see a problem with code verbosity [...] (It makes some sense, I suppose, to think of comments as a list, but *unordered*? If you're going to group them at all, wouldn't the order be important? Bruce Lawson ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2013Jan/0111.html)'s observation that comments are heavily dependent on context would seem to support the idea that it *is* important, especially since some comments are responses to others.) agreed it would be better to use order lists. Wordpress blogs, for example, have comments like Bob Smith said at a href=#permalink9.55 on 31 Febtember/a: LOL Thus, every comment has a link that a UA can use to jump from comment to comment. The order is implied via the timestamp. So what's wrong with article h1Witty blogpost/h1 plorem ipsum section h235 erudite and well-reasoned comments/h2 divBob Smith said at a href=#permalink19.55 on 31 Febtember/a: Can I use DRM in Polyglot documents?/div divHixie said at a href=#permalink29.57 on 1 June/a: What's your use case?/div ... /section /article In short, why should the spec suggest any specific method of marking up comments? Good question, in the case of article recommended tomarkup comments it seems like it's an element in search of a use case. For users who consume article semantics it appear to cause issues when used for any piece of content ranging from a one sentence comment to an article containing thousands of words or an interactive widget. regards SteveF
Re: [whatwg] use of article to markup comments
List elements and sectioning elements both represent hierarchical relationships. They differ in how they emphasize that relationship: lists emphasize the hierarchy outside the content, while sectioning emphasizes the hierarchy within the content. If the question is specifically about how to mark up comments on a blog post or something, there's no reason you can't combine the two methods: Each comment is a self-contained article, with relationships between comments represented by ol. One example: http://jsbin.com/edewoy/1 That example presumes you consider blog post comments (or replies to comments) as a section within the content that is being commented on (or replied to). You could also modify the markup to have two articles (one for the blog post and one for the comments) packaged within a single parent article, but the principle is the same. Note that the key here is that there is no restriction on combining lists and sectioning elements, and thereby no need to modify the semantics of ol or ul (as proposed in [2] in the root message). Gordon On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 12:13 PM, Steve Faulkner faulkner.st...@gmail.com wrote: Brucel wrote: On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 10:56:10 -, Steve Faulkner faulkner.st...@gmail.com wrote: Lists are appropriate for indicating nested tree structures. The use of lists to markup comments is a common mark up pattern used in blogging software such as wordpress. The code verbosity is not dissimilar to the use of article, less so even option end /li tags are omitted. Besides comments are generated code not hand authored so I don't see a problem with code verbosity [...] (It makes some sense, I suppose, to think of comments as a list, but *unordered*? If you're going to group them at all, wouldn't the order be important? Bruce Lawson ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2013Jan/0111.html)'s observation that comments are heavily dependent on context would seem to support the idea that it *is* important, especially since some comments are responses to others.) agreed it would be better to use order lists. Wordpress blogs, for example, have comments like Bob Smith said at a href=#permalink9.55 on 31 Febtember/a: LOL Thus, every comment has a link that a UA can use to jump from comment to comment. The order is implied via the timestamp. So what's wrong with article h1Witty blogpost/h1 plorem ipsum section h235 erudite and well-reasoned comments/h2 divBob Smith said at a href=#permalink19.55 on 31 Febtember/a: Can I use DRM in Polyglot documents?/div divHixie said at a href=#permalink29.57 on 1 June/a: What's your use case?/div ... /section /article In short, why should the spec suggest any specific method of marking up comments? Good question, in the case of article recommended tomarkup comments it seems like it's an element in search of a use case. For users who consume article semantics it appear to cause issues when used for any piece of content ranging from a one sentence comment to an article containing thousands of words or an interactive widget. regards SteveF -- Gordon P. Hemsley m...@gphemsley.org http://gphemsley.org/ • http://gphemsley.org/blog/
Re: [whatwg] use of article to markup comments
On 01/26/2013 05:30 AM, Bruce Lawson wrote: (It makes some sense, I suppose, to think of comments as a list, but *unordered*? If you're going to group them at all, wouldn't the order be important? Bruce Lawson ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2013Jan/0111.html)'s observation that comments are heavily dependent on context would seem to support the idea that it *is* important, especially since some comments are responses to others.) agreed it would be better to use order lists. Wordpress blogs, for example, have comments like Bob Smith said at a href=#permalink9.55 on 31 Febtember/a: LOL Thus, every comment has a link that a UA can use to jump from comment to comment. The order is implied via the timestamp. So what's wrong with article h1Witty blogpost/h1 plorem ipsum section h235 erudite and well-reasoned comments/h2 divBob Smith said at a href=#permalink19.55 on 31 Febtember/a: Can I use DRM in Polyglot documents?/div divHixie said at a href=#permalink29.57 on 1 June/a: What's your use case?/div ... /section /article In short, why should the spec suggest any specific method of marking up comments? I think examples are useful for clearly illustrating the spec. An example in the spec shouldn't be construed as the only right way of doing things, of course. So, maybe a better question is why should the spec suggest only one specific method? -- Adrian Testa-Avila adr...@custom-anything.com http://www.custom-anything.com/contact follow on facebook http://www.facebook.com/customanything
Re: [whatwg] use of article to markup comments
On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 10:56:10 -, Steve Faulkner faulkner.st...@gmail.com wrote: Lists are appropriate for indicating nested tree structures. The use of lists to markup comments is a common mark up pattern used in blogging software such as wordpress. The code verbosity is not dissimilar to the use of article, less so even option end /li tags are omitted. Besides comments are generated code not hand authored so I don't see a problem with code verbosity [...] (It makes some sense, I suppose, to think of comments as a list, but *unordered*? If you're going to group them at all, wouldn't the order be important? Bruce Lawson ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2013Jan/0111.html)'s observation that comments are heavily dependent on context would seem to support the idea that it *is* important, especially since some comments are responses to others.) agreed it would be better to use order lists. Wordpress blogs, for example, have comments like Bob Smith said at a href=#permalink9.55 on 31 Febtember/a: LOL Thus, every comment has a link that a UA can use to jump from comment to comment. The order is implied via the timestamp. So what's wrong with article h1Witty blogpost/h1 plorem ipsum section h235 erudite and well-reasoned comments/h2 divBob Smith said at a href=#permalink19.55 on 31 Febtember/a: Can I use DRM in Polyglot documents?/div divHixie said at a href=#permalink29.57 on 1 June/a: What's your use case?/div ... /section /article In short, why should the spec suggest any specific method of marking up comments? -- Bruce Lawson Open standards evangelist Developer Relations Team Opera http://dev.opera.com
[whatwg] use of article to markup comments
Over on the HTML WG list [1] we have been discussing the use of the article element to mark up comments. I have sketched out a few alternative possibilities to the current recommendation in the spec of using the article element as it has been indicated by users who consume the semantics that its use is suboptimal. I am bringing this over here as well as one of the suggestions I have [2] made may include implementation changes [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2013Jan/thread.html#msg109 [2] http://www.html5accessibility.com/tests/comments.html -- with regards Steve Faulkner Technical Director - TPG www.paciellogroup.com | www.HTML5accessibility.com | www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives - dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/ Web Accessibility Toolbar - www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
Re: [whatwg] use of article to markup comments
On 01/25/2013 03:44 AM, Steve Faulkner wrote: Over on the HTML WG list [1] we have been discussing the use of the article element to mark up comments. I have sketched out a few alternative possibilities to the current recommendation in the spec of using the article element as it has been indicated by users who consume the semantics that its use is suboptimal. I am bringing this over here as well as one of the suggestions I have [2] made may include implementation changes [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2013Jan/thread.html#msg109 [2] http://www.html5accessibility.com/tests/comments.html I would be concerned that recommending the use of ul would simply confuse matters further, and lead to messier, unnecessarily verbose markup. A clean list of comments is fine, but most comments end up tree-structured, not lists. Tree-uls are quite verbose compared to simply nesting articles. (It makes some sense, I suppose, to think of comments as a list, but *unordered*? If you're going to group them at all, wouldn't the order be important? Bruce Lawson ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2013Jan/0111.html)'s observation that comments are heavily dependent on context would seem to support the idea that it *is* important, especially since some comments are responses to others.) Robin Berjorn ( http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2013Jan/0115.html) made a suggestion to wrap comment article elements inside a details element, which seems like a good approach, both in terms of semantics and practical result. *However*, I don't see anything wrong or confusing about nested articles. I think it makes perfect sense. Someone (can't find it now) wrote that the goal of AT applications is to read the contents of the main article, without comments or other distractions - the fact that a comment article is nested inside another automatically implies that it is *supportive*, and not an integral part of the main article itself (it can be excluded without negative impact). -- Adrian Testa-Avila adr...@custom-anything.com http://www.custom-anything.com/contact follow on facebook http://www.facebook.com/customanything
