Summary element - Revision history

Crissov:

2014-10-22T11:00:54Z

<tldr>

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:00, 22 October 2014
Line 36:		Line 36:
	* +1 [http://twitter.com/dalmaer/status/20318049663 Dion Almaer:] <nowiki><figcaption></nowiki> or just reuse <nowiki><summary></nowiki> in more places. I am with @t on that one :)		* +1 [http://twitter.com/dalmaer/status/20318049663 Dion Almaer:] <nowiki><figcaption></nowiki> or just reuse <nowiki><summary></nowiki> in more places. I am with @t on that one :)
	* -0 [[User:EdwardOConnor\|EdwardOConnor]] - I'm OK with the status quo; barring that, I'd prefer renaming <nowiki><summary></nowiki> to more specifically describe its use in <nowiki><details></nowiki>.		* -0 [[User:EdwardOConnor\|EdwardOConnor]] - I'm OK with the status quo; barring that, I'd prefer renaming <nowiki><summary></nowiki> to more specifically describe its use in <nowiki><details></nowiki>.
	* +0 [[User:Crissov\|Päper]] – I like general purpose, context-aware elements, but maybe the alleged confusion is better solved by a dedicated, intuitively named element: I added a third, <code><abstract></code>, option above		* +0 [[User:Crissov\|Päper]] – I like general purpose, context-aware elements, but maybe the alleged confusion is better solved by a dedicated, intuitively named element: I added a third, <code><abstract></code>, option above – <code><tldr></code> would also be a popular name for it
	* ...		* ...

	[[Category:Proposals]]		[[Category:Proposals]]

Annevk: categorize

2011-01-26T12:20:12Z

categorize

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:20, 26 January 2011
Line 38:		Line 38:
	* +0 [[User:Crissov\|Päper]] – I like general purpose, context-aware elements, but maybe the alleged confusion is better solved by a dedicated, intuitively named element: I added a third, <code><abstract></code>, option above		* +0 [[User:Crissov\|Päper]] – I like general purpose, context-aware elements, but maybe the alleged confusion is better solved by a dedicated, intuitively named element: I added a third, <code><abstract></code>, option above
	* ...		* ...

			[[Category:Proposals]]

Crissov: /* summary naming or flexibility */ 3. generic

2010-08-26T06:49:56Z

summary naming or flexibility: 3. generic <abstract>

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:49, 26 August 2010
Line 19:		Line 19:
	# '''Rename the details <code><summary></code>''' to something more specific (suggestions welcome), <em>OR</em>:		# '''Rename the details <code><summary></code>''' to something more specific (suggestions welcome), <em>OR</em>:
	# '''Alternatively make the <code><summary></code> element generic.''' Make it an actual summary inside <code><article></code> or <code><body></code>, as well as inside <code><details></code>. Allow <code><summary></code> anywhere <code><header></code> is allowed (basically, make it a part of the new section related elements).		# '''Alternatively make the <code><summary></code> element generic.''' Make it an actual summary inside <code><article></code> or <code><body></code>, as well as inside <code><details></code>. Allow <code><summary></code> anywhere <code><header></code> is allowed (basically, make it a part of the new section related elements).
			# '''Add a generic summary element''', <code><abstract></code> for instance.

	I prefer the second solution, make the <code><summary></code> element more generic/flexible. — [[User:Tantek\|Tantek]] 20:38, 3 August 2010 (UTC)		I prefer the second solution, make the <code><summary></code> element more generic/flexible. — [[User:Tantek\|Tantek]] 20:38, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Line 35:		Line 36:
	* +1 [http://twitter.com/dalmaer/status/20318049663 Dion Almaer:] <nowiki><figcaption></nowiki> or just reuse <nowiki><summary></nowiki> in more places. I am with @t on that one :)		* +1 [http://twitter.com/dalmaer/status/20318049663 Dion Almaer:] <nowiki><figcaption></nowiki> or just reuse <nowiki><summary></nowiki> in more places. I am with @t on that one :)
	* -0 [[User:EdwardOConnor\|EdwardOConnor]] - I'm OK with the status quo; barring that, I'd prefer renaming <nowiki><summary></nowiki> to more specifically describe its use in <nowiki><details></nowiki>.		* -0 [[User:EdwardOConnor\|EdwardOConnor]] - I'm OK with the status quo; barring that, I'd prefer renaming <nowiki><summary></nowiki> to more specifically describe its use in <nowiki><details></nowiki>.
			* +0 [[User:Crissov\|Päper]] – I like general purpose, context-aware elements, but maybe the alleged confusion is better solved by a dedicated, intuitively named element: I added a third, <code><abstract></code>, option above
	* ...		* ...

TheresaOConnor: -0

2010-08-14T04:05:51Z

-0

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:05, 14 August 2010
Line 34:		Line 34:
	</div>		</div>
	* +1 [http://twitter.com/dalmaer/status/20318049663 Dion Almaer:] <nowiki><figcaption></nowiki> or just reuse <nowiki><summary></nowiki> in more places. I am with @t on that one :)		* +1 [http://twitter.com/dalmaer/status/20318049663 Dion Almaer:] <nowiki><figcaption></nowiki> or just reuse <nowiki><summary></nowiki> in more places. I am with @t on that one :)
			* -0 [[User:EdwardOConnor\|EdwardOConnor]] - I'm OK with the status quo; barring that, I'd prefer renaming <nowiki><summary></nowiki> to more specifically describe its use in <nowiki><details></nowiki>.
	* ...		* ...

Tantek: note and link to Dion Almaer support

2010-08-05T01:42:51Z

note and link to Dion Almaer support

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:42, 5 August 2010
Line 33:		Line 33:
	* Bruce Lawson: I don't think there's a need for a generic summary element. But I'd support renaming the summary attribute of details (because it doesn't really summarise). Perhaps "rubric" could replace details>summary and figure>figcaption ?		* Bruce Lawson: I don't think there's a need for a generic summary element. But I'd support renaming the summary attribute of details (because it doesn't really summarise). Perhaps "rubric" could replace details>summary and figure>figcaption ?
	</div>		</div>
			* +1 [http://twitter.com/dalmaer/status/20318049663 Dion Almaer:] <nowiki><figcaption></nowiki> or just reuse <nowiki><summary></nowiki> in more places. I am with @t on that one :)
			* ...

Tantek: moved Summary to Summary element

2010-08-04T22:11:05Z

moved Summary to Summary element

← Older revision	Revision as of 22:11, 4 August 2010
(No difference)

Brucelawson: /* summary flexibility advantages */

2010-08-04T08:00:02Z

summary flexibility advantages

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:00, 4 August 2010
Line 31:		Line 31:
	Opinions / discussion:		Opinions / discussion:
	* +1 [[User:Tantek\|Tantek]] - I think web authors would make good use of a new generic <code><summary></code> element.		* +1 [[User:Tantek\|Tantek]] - I think web authors would make good use of a new generic <code><summary></code> element.
	* ...		* Bruce Lawson: I don't think there's a need for a generic summary element. But I'd support renaming the summary attribute of details (because it doesn't really summarise). Perhaps "rubric" could replace details>summary and figure>figcaption ?
	</div>		</div>

Tantek: subhead

2010-08-03T20:51:32Z

subhead

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:51, 3 August 2010
Line 5:		Line 5:
	{{For\|the summary attribute\|Table Summary}}		{{For\|the summary attribute\|Table Summary}}

	=== summary naming or flexibility ===		== summary naming or flexibility ==

	Currently the <code><summary></code> element is a special element specifically for use for the label inside the <code><details></code> element.		Currently the <code><summary></code> element is a special element specifically for use for the label inside the <code><details></code> element.
Line 22:		Line 22:
	I prefer the second solution, make the <code><summary></code> element more generic/flexible. — [[User:Tantek\|Tantek]] 20:38, 3 August 2010 (UTC)		I prefer the second solution, make the <code><summary></code> element more generic/flexible. — [[User:Tantek\|Tantek]] 20:38, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

			=== summary flexibility advantages ===
	Advantages of making the <code><summary></code> element more generic and flexible:		Advantages of making the <code><summary></code> element more generic and flexible:
	* This is '''close to the semantic of the Atom "summary" element''', and the hAtom microformat 'entry-summary' property.		* This is '''close to the semantic of the Atom "summary" element''', and the hAtom microformat 'entry-summary' property.

Tantek: /* summary naming or flexibility */ allow summary anywhere header is permitted

2010-08-03T20:49:59Z

summary naming or flexibility: allow summary anywhere header is permitted

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:49, 3 August 2010
Line 18:		Line 18:

	# '''Rename the details <code><summary></code>''' to something more specific (suggestions welcome), <em>OR</em>:		# '''Rename the details <code><summary></code>''' to something more specific (suggestions welcome), <em>OR</em>:
	# '''Alternatively make the <code><summary></code> element generic.''' Make it an actual summary inside <code><article></code> or <code><body></code>, as well as inside <code><details></code>.		# '''Alternatively make the <code><summary></code> element generic.''' Make it an actual summary inside <code><article></code> or <code><body></code>, as well as inside <code><details></code>. Allow <code><summary></code> anywhere <code><header></code> is allowed (basically, make it a part of the new section related elements).

	I prefer the second solution, make the <code><summary></code> element more generic/flexible. — [[User:Tantek\|Tantek]] 20:38, 3 August 2010 (UTC)		I prefer the second solution, make the <code><summary></code> element more generic/flexible. — [[User:Tantek\|Tantek]] 20:38, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Tantek: draft

2010-08-03T20:38:25Z

draft

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:38, 3 August 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	#~~redirect~~:[[~~Table_Summary~~]]		{{stub}}

			The <code><summary></code> element is a new element in HTML5, a child of the new <code><[[details]]></code> element.

			{{For\|the summary attribute\|Table Summary}}

			=== summary naming or flexibility ===

			Currently the <code><summary></code> element is a special element specifically for use for the label inside the <code><details></code> element.

			The name of the <code><summary></code> element however is too generic sounding of an element name for this special usage.

			It is inevitable that people will begin using the <code><summary></code> element when they simply mean a semantic "summary", perhaps of a <code><section></code> or <code><article></code>.

			I say inevitable due to the broad evidence presented by the known existing problem with the <code><address></code> element (special use - for contact information for the document, but used and often errantly taught as a generic "address" for street addresses).

			Thus we should <em>either</em>:

			# '''Rename the details <code><summary></code>''' to something more specific (suggestions welcome), <em>OR</em>:
			# '''Alternatively make the <code><summary></code> element generic.''' Make it an actual summary inside <code><article></code> or <code><body></code>, as well as inside <code><details></code>.

			I prefer the second solution, make the <code><summary></code> element more generic/flexible. — [[User:Tantek\|Tantek]] 20:38, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

			Advantages of making the <code><summary></code> element more generic and flexible:
			* This is '''close to the semantic of the Atom "summary" element''', and the hAtom microformat 'entry-summary' property.
			* This would allow an '''enhancement of the algorithm for converting HTML5 to Atom''': take the first HTML5 <code><summary></code> inside an <code><article></code> being converted to an entry, and use that HTML5 <code><summary></code> as the Atom entry <code><summary></code>.


			<div class="discussion">
			Opinions / discussion:
			* +1 [[User:Tantek\|Tantek]] - I think web authors would make good use of a new generic <code><summary></code> element.
			* ...
			</div>