On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 16:49:25 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 9/16/13 9:44 AM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
I noticed the change: dd -> div. This is bad, because it
reduces semantics.
The change was from unqualified <dd> to <div class="param">.
Big difference.
(I assume that "param" is now used with the meaning of the
abstract value of the "class" HTML attribute, in contrast to its
previous occurrence as the literal "param" CSS class from the <i>
example)
Now you're arguing that <dd class="param"> is better than <div
class="param">. This is more interesting, and I'd like to get
convinced one way or another.
Is the Wikipedia link I posted earlier not applicable? I believe
it discusses why it is beneficial to use HTML tags that reflect,
or reflect closely the semantics of their contents. E.g. <nav>
instead of <div> for navigation blocks, <address> instead of
<span> for addresses, and respectively <dd> instead of <div> for
definition lists.
For my part I prefer the minimal commitment of <div> - just
leave it to the style to decide how to go about things. So I
have minimal hardcoding of semantics in the generated html, and
maximum flexibility in the CSS - I can get to hide the thing
altogether, or format it in ways that are very different from
classic <dd>.
Right. I think I found the source of the misunderstanding: the
idea is not to depend on the default formatting of <dd> - the
idea is to remove the default styles using CSS, then use it like
<div>, which is what the old code did.
(Apologies to everyone for, once again, blowing up a nitpick
matter into an overgrown discussion of a dozen posts.)
