Michael A. Peters wrote:
Robert Cummings wrote:
Many government documents have the concept of "aside" as appearing
through the document and contextually near to the information to which
the aside relates. The entire sidebar seems a bit gratuitous as an
"aside". Sure it's aside, but it's not exactly the semantic meaning of
aside.
From the W3C Working Draft:
"The aside element represents a section of a page that consists
of content that is tangentially related to the content around
the aside element, and which could be considered separate from
that content. Such sections are often represented as sidebars
in printed typography.
The element can also be used for typographical effects like pull
quotes."
http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/semantics.html#the-aside-element
Cheers,
Rob.
I'm basically following this model -
http://www.alistapart.com/articles/previewofhtml5
It took very little work since I was essentially doing that already.
aside is the most logical html 5 layout tag for describing the sidebar
in a two column layout.
I suppose one could put multiple aside elements in a classic <div
{id,class}="sidebar"> but I don't really see the benefit.
Since the aside used as a sidebar is neither a child of the article or
section, it is an aside to the main content div.
He doesn't mark it with an ID. But then one could argue the header and
footer are also "tangentially" related to the main content. This strike
me as semantic watering down. And I can see he's trying to start a trend:
"The aside element is for content that is tangentially
related to the content around it, and is typically useful
for marking up sidebars."
WTF, "typically". HTML5 isn't typical of anything yet. The page name is
even "previewofhtml5". Oh well, some clowns just like to apply new paint
to the same old tired routine.
Cheers,
Rob.
--
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
