

[Bug 5777] referencing subordinate text or asides should be through an alternate attribute

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 22:32:30 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1KABdG-00065T-KT@wiggum.w3.org>


Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
             Status|REOPENED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX

--- Comment #3 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>  2008-06-21 22:32:30 ---
Those points were all considered, though possibly in discussion prior to the
cited e-mail (in which case my apologies, I've no idea where the discussion
would be archived). Fundamentally though, the result is the same -- there are
acceptable ways to work around the majority of the limitations, and in the
cases where there aren't, the limitations themselves are acceptable limitations
to have in HTML5 when we consider where such features would fall in the
prioritisation of what we want to add to the language now. We have to be very
careful not to add so much that we become Docbook. We're not trying to be a
be-all and end-all of typography. The Web is its own thing.

For example, that you can't put a "footnote" inside a link is not a big deal.
Instead of writing:

   <a href="a.html">foo bar <footnote> bar is baz </footnote> quux</a>

...one can write:

   <a href="a.html">foo bar quux</a> <a href="#f1" id="r1">[1]</a>
   <p id="f1"><a href="#r1">[1]</a> bar is quux</p>

You might not thing it's perfect, but it's a reasonable compromise because it
happens so rarely. We don't have to address every use case, only the major

(Also, subordinate text had better be related text, because if it's not related
people will get very confused about why it is subordinate!)

You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Saturday, 21 June 2008 22:33:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 21 June 2008 22:33:05 GMT