I generally markup pages using ARIA roles: <header role=banner> <article role=main> <footer role=contentinfo>
and variations thereafter— If there were to be a <main> attribute (with an implicit ARIA role to match), where would it end? <contentinfo> <banner> ? What is to be gained by adding an element, rather than using ARIA roles? Isn't that what ARIA is designed for? On 08/11/2012, at 1:23 AM, "Simon Pieters" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > My impression from TPAC is that implementors are on board with the idea of > adding <main> to HTML, and we're left with Hixie objecting to it. > > Hixie's argument is, I think, that the use case that <main> is intended to > address is already possible by applying the Scooby-Doo algorithm, as James > put it -- remove all elements that are not main content, <header>, <aside>, > etc., and you're left with the main content. > > I think the Scooby-Doo algorithm is a heuristic that is not reliable enough > in practice, since authors are likely to put stuff outside the main content > that do not get filtered out by the algorithm, and vice versa. > > Implementations that want to support a "go to main content" or "highlight the > main content", like Safari's Reader Mode, or whatever it's called, need to > have various heuristics for detecting the main content, and is expected to > work even for pages that don't use any of the new elements. However, I think > using <main> as a way to opt out of the heuristic works better than using > <aside> to opt out of the heuristic. For instance, it seems reasonable to use > <aside> for a pull-quote as part of the main content, and you don't want that > to be excluded, but the Scooby-Doo algorithm does that. > > If there is anyone besides from Hixie who objects to adding <main>, it would > be useful to hear it. > > -- > Simon Pieters > Opera Software
