On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 17:08:21 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 9/16/13 9:56 AM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
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.
I don't understand this paragraph.
You presented the example regarding replacing <i> with <div
class="param">. We agree that this is a good change.
I understood that your argument against using <dd> is its
*stylistic* (not semantic) properties: by default, a <dd> has
additional CSS styles that are not present on <div> tags.
We agreed that tags that have only stylistic properties, such as
<i>, should not be used. <i> has no semantic meaning (its
recommended replacement is <em>, short for "emphasized", which
has the same default stylistic properties, but now also has
semantic meaning).
I understood that you applied the above arguments together, to
conclude that <dd> should not be used for the same reasons that
that <i> should not be used - <i> has the same semantic
properties as <span>.
However, the difference between <dd> and <div class="d_decl_dd">
is that the former has semantics which the latter doesn't. (To
clarify, by "semantics" I mean meaning that can be useful to
user-agents reading the HTML, such as screen readers.)
