This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
While coding for the content of a blog post, we have <header> to wrap heading, author, and publish time; And we have <footer> to wrap categories links and other metadata; However, we currently don't have <content> to wrap paragraphs and figures. Therefore, maybe we could have <content> introduced.
But there are the <section> and <article> elements available to wrap such things? If you have a <header>, <footer> and several <aside>s in an <article> or <section>, than everything else IS content. Process of elimination.
(In reply to comment #1) > But there are the <section> and <article> elements available to wrap such > things? If you have a <header>, <footer> and several <aside>s in an <article> > or <section>, than everything else IS content. Process of elimination. Process of elimination is okay. However, without being wrapped by a <content> tag, all content elements look like they are at the same level as <header> and <footer> elements. If we have the <content> tag to wrap all those various content elements, our mockup will looks cleaner and tidier.
This bug was cloned to create bug 17819 as part of operation convergence.
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the Editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the Tracker Issue; or you may create a Tracker Issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Rejected Change Description: No change. Rationale: This has been considered and rejected several times in the history of this WG. For instance, see this thread from August 2009: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Aug/thread.html#msg858 Feel free to repoen this bug if you have new information.