On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 1:55 AM, Shaun Moss <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2011-09-05 6:36 PM, Odin wrote: >> On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Shaun Moss<[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> Yes, but this is not semantic!!! Comments are not articles. They are >>> completely different. Comments can appear in reference to things that are >>> not articles (such as status updates), and therefore would not appear >>> inside >>> an<article> tag - so how would the browser recognise them as comments? >> >> It is semantic. >> >> Comments *are* in fact articles. You're thinking of it in the wrong >> way. Article is not a newspaper article, but something that would make >> sense to stand on its own. > > Please explain to me how it makes sense for a comment to stand on its own.
For example: <http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/cf1n2/holy_fuck_i_just_saw_someone_get_hit_by_a_train/c0s4de4> (Comment pulled at random from r/bestof.) A comment is an individual piece of work that may be usefully cited on its own. It's related to the parent article (which may be another comment, or may be the original blogpost), but it can be usefully viewed by itself and syndicated. ~TJ
