15939 2012-02-08 23:29:13 +0000 The potential to have and untitled section seems like a detriment to the point of outline. Likely a usability and accessibility hurdle. Should having a heading be required? Otherwise, whats the point of having an outline in the first place? 2012-09-07 05:26:11 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified WHATWG HTML unspecified Other other RESOLVED WONTFIX http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#outlines P3 normal Unsorted 1 contributor ian hans.hillen ian jonathan mike contributor oldest_to_newest 63911 0 contributor 2012-02-08 23:29:13 +0000 Specification: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/sections.html Multipage: http://www.whatwg.org/C#outlines Complete: http://www.whatwg.org/c#outlines Comment: The potential to have and untitled section seems like a detriment to the point of outline. Likely a usability and accessibility hurdle. Should having a heading be required? Otherwise, whats the point of having an outline in the first place? Posted from: 173.165.21.33 User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:10.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/10.0 63912 1 jonathan 2012-02-08 23:35:31 +0000 The spec indicates that 'untitled section' is not the required language. That not the point. The point is a section must always have a heading. 70583 2 contributor 2012-07-18 16:18:16 +0000 This bug was cloned to create bug 18057 as part of operation convergence. 73392 3 ian 2012-09-07 05:26:11 +0000 I don't think it makes sense to require headings. There's plenty of pages on which sections, e.g. navigation sections, sidebars with ads in them, asides with pull quotes, etc, can or even should legitimately not have a heading. Yeah, on those pages the outline will not be perfectly pretty, but that's ok, IMHO.