On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 17:14:01 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 9/16/13 10:01 AM, Brad Anderson wrote:
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.
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.
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>.
Your example is: i -> span class="param". This is good,
because it
improves semantics.
Great.
Andrei
Why not just make every element a div with a class in that
case?
The point of using specific elements is to get their default
attributes "for free". Otherwise one would need to specify a
bunch in the class definitions.
I can see how using specific elements may help the browser if
the user alters the defaults.
The point is the semantics, not the default styling. The default
styling exists just to give them a sane default to work with.
