I'm with Patrick on this one. The <form>, <fieldset> and <label> elements provide all the semantic structure you need. Anything else is noise.
Steve Green Test Partners Ltd -----Original Message----- From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org] On Behalf Of Eric Taylor Sent: 10 November 2010 17:30 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] HTML5 - Marking up forms Understandable; however, with the change in HTML5 from Definition Lists to Description lists, would it not be more semantically valuable to mark forms up using <dt> and <dd>, for labels and inputs, providing the document with a more solid structure? As stated, my concern with this is the lack of grouping per item, when using Description Lists. I understand that paragraphs may be easier to handle when marking up forms and doing the CSS; however, is it a meaningful method of marking up forms that supports the forward progression of HTML5 and front-end development in general? This is the main reason I'm torn between Description lists and Unordered/Ordered lists. What makes most sense from a semantics view, and where is the balance between semantics and ease-of-use? Eric Taylor < Elements Aside /> http://www.elementsaside.com On Nov 10, 2010, at 11:41 AM, "Patrick H. Lauke" <re...@splintered.co.uk> wrote: > On 10/11/2010 17:08, Eric Taylor wrote: >> From my experience, the best practice, currently, is using >> Description lists; however, my concern with this method is the lack >> of semantic grouping when using this set of elements. >> >> Another method I have used is using an Unordered list to group each >> field inside of a list item. However, this doesn't seem like it makes >> as much sense, semantically, as the Description list. >> >> What do you all think, and how do you go about marking up your forms >> in HTML5? > > HTML5 does not add any new semantics or constructs to mark up the structure > of forms, it only adds new types, a few features (autofocus for instance) and > validation functionality. > > How you actually structure the lot is still as before (and there are > still likely heated arguments over which way is good or > not...personally, I just use paragraphs, as the extra structure of > lists is just overkill in my opinion) > > P > -- > Patrick H. Lauke > ______________________________________________________________ > re\xAD\xF4dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : > re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] > > www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk > http://redux.deviantart.com | http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ > ______________________________________________________________ > twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke > ______________________________________________________________ > > > ******************************************************************* > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm > Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org > ******************************************************************* > ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ******************************************************************* ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *******************************************************************
