Re: Semantic Value of HTML Elements
Reply #1 –
Since I was the one that added some of those html5 tags, let me share my thoughts.
First: I based my decisions on readings on the internet (including relevant parts of the specifications, but not so deeply), that led me to the conclusion not even those that wrote the specification had very clear in mind what they wanted to do with those tags (i.e. they are so generic they can be used in almost any way and can be argued in almost any way they are used).
Second: I used section mostly randomly, but usually with the idea that it delimits "groups" of related content (e.g. the body has a section that includes the header (with the logo, the main menu, etc.), another that contains the main part of the page (the posts), and a footer)
Third: I may have used nav way too much.
Re: Semantic Value of HTML Elements
Reply #4 –
Speaking of <aside>, i changed the News container to an <aside>.
Re: v1.0..x, haven't check but that's going to suck considering my edits,, i assumed i had the newest version since my install, like 2 weeks ago, but hmm, i did install from my CPanel.
Re: Semantic Value of HTML Elements
Reply #5 –
Yeah, 1.1 is in release candidacy
you can use unified diffs to compare your changes vs the release. I did that when I forgot to track my edits.
Re: Semantic Value of HTML Elements
Reply #7 –
Technically, forums are a pain in any case.
Topics are spread across multiple pages, and one could argue that each page may not stand by itself, but would need at least all the previous posts to understand the context.