Re: H1 semantics (Daneel Pang Swee Chee)
From: (Daneel Pang Swee Chee)
Message-id: <>
Subject: Re: H1 semantics
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1993 14:33:15 +0800 (WST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL3]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Length: 1721      
Status: RO
:)Klaus Harbo said:
:) HOWEVER, I my view (as I think I've stated before, only then with
:) regard to P elements) HTML ought to be redesigned to have richer
:) structure, ie. using containers much more.  The present HTML DTD makes
:) document instances flat, being mostly a sequence of elements.

I agree with this completely.  Over on our side, we have "extended"
HTML a little for our needs, which, amongst other things, included the
ability to share information at a structure level (for example, my chapter
2 is actually your chapter 7 or even your section 5). 
However, we wanted "compatibility" with HTML so that we can share the vast 
amount of resources available there.
We had a hard time with <P> basically because it's not a container in
HTML but should be one in our case.

:) 	<!ENTITY % h1contents	(h1title,(A|P|H2|%text;|....)+)> 
:) 		<!-- this sketch only serves to demonstrate
:) 		     that H2 elements would nest in H1 elements. -->

:) 	<!ENTITY % h1contents	(title,(A|P|H2|%text;|....)+)> 
:) 		<!-- with a generic title element -->
:) which is much nicer, which - again - illustrates the desirability of
:) using container rather than sequencing everything.

However, you'll loose the ability to utilize old HTML documents which
are already out there, wouldn't you? since your "H1" is now a container
for both the TITLE and the rest of the "sub-document" (similarly for
H2, H3....).

What we did was to define it this way:

<!ELEMENT HD1  - -  ( H1,(%s.zz|HD2)*) -- part       -->

[Daneel Pang]              | A well adjusted person is one who makes the same  	   | mistakes twice without geting nervous.
(65)772-0517               | mistakes twice without geting nervous.