Is DTD v2.0a still moving towards XHTML?

[Ross Gardler <rg...@apache.org>]

Some time ago we decided that our intermediate format would migrate to a 
subset of XHTML2. Now I don't want to open that debate again (we've done 
it twice and all the arguments and decisions are there in the archives), 
but I do have a question regarding this.

In XHTML2 it is legal to have a section without a title. We had a hard 
time working out when this might be useful, however, I now have a use case.

I have a skin that needs to group two sections together, one is a slide 
and one is the text that goes with this slide. I therefore use:

<section>
   <section class="slide">
     <title>Slide 1</title>
     ...
   </section>
   <section>
     <title>Description of Slide1</title>
     ...
   </section>
<section>

So, my question is. Are there any objections to me making this possible 
in v2.0a?

Ross

Re: Is DTD v2.0a still moving towards XHTML?

[Dave Brondsema <da...@brondsema.net>]

On Fri, 30 Jul 2004, Ross Gardler wrote:

> Some time ago we decided that our intermediate format would migrate to a
> subset of XHTML2. Now I don't want to open that debate again (we've done
> it twice and all the arguments and decisions are there in the archives),
> but I do have a question regarding this.
>
> In XHTML2 it is legal to have a section without a title. We had a hard
> time working out when this might be useful, however, I now have a use case.
>
> I have a skin that needs to group two sections together, one is a slide
> and one is the text that goes with this slide. I therefore use:
>
> <section>
>    <section class="slide">
>      <title>Slide 1</title>
>      ...
>    </section>
>    <section>
>      <title>Description of Slide1</title>
>      ...
>    </section>
> <section>
>

Another use-case:  In Forrest's own Who's Who page, I wasn't comfortable
with any name for the "notes" section; I wanted it to be titleless.  I
could achieve the same appearance by putting those last paragraphs in the
previous section, but then the heirarchical structure wouldn't accurately
reflect the organization of the document.

-- 
Dave Brondsema : dave@brondsema.net
http://www.brondsema.net : personal
http://www.splike.com : programming
http://csx.calvin.edu : student org

Re: Is DTD v2.0a still moving towards XHTML?

[Rick Tessner <ri...@onnadayr.ca>]

On Fri, 2004-07-30 at 07:23, Ross Gardler wrote:

> <section>
>    <section class="slide">
>      <title>Slide 1</title>
>      ...
>    </section>
>    <section>
>      <title>Description of Slide1</title>
>      ...
>    </section>
> <section>
> 
> So, my question is. Are there any objections to me making this possible 
> in v2.0a?

Since there is now a v2.0 (unreleased so far), if there are no
objections to adding a titleless section, I'd say it'd be best to add it
there.

-- 
Rick Tessner <ri...@onnadayr.ca>

Re: Is DTD v2.0a still moving towards XHTML?

[Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>]

Ross Gardler wrote:
...
> In XHTML2 it is legal to have a section without a title. 
...
> So, my question is. Are there any objections to me making this possible 
> in v2.0a?

Anything needed that will be legal in XHTML2 is ok for me.

-- 
Nicola Ken Barozzi                   nicolaken@apache.org
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------