Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ravenstine 2205 days ago
You're not wrong, but I'll note that the definition of <article> you are referring to seems pretty useless, and I don't think it's wrong for people to generally decide what <article> should mean.

I don't see anywhere that defines <aside> as being used for cards. But <aside> should be used for cards if the card itself is an aside.

> Here, have an article within a section. … what? That ain’t semantic.

What's not semantic about that? An article =/= a page. A page can have multiple articles; the idea of an "article" is pretty abstract.
1 comments
awb 2204 days ago
> But <aside> should be used for cards if the card itself is an aside.

That's exactly how I treat cards with MVP.css. Note: "aside" doesn't mean it visually needs to be "on the side", just complimentary to the body content.

https://andybrewer.github.io/mvp/

link
chrismorgan 2204 days ago
I still strongly oppose your use of aside there. (And it was indeed that that I was referring to in my original comment here.) Those cards are part of the flow of the document, not tangentially related to the adjacent content.
link
awb 2204 days ago
I don't think it's that dissimilar to Mozilla's usage here: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/as...

The 1st `<p>` talks about the movie and the `<aside>` talks about a feature/statistic related to the movie.

In mine, the main content talks about the what the library is and how to use it and `<aside>` is used to call out specific features related to the library.

In either, the "feature" content could be part of the main content or called out separately and both would seem reasonable to me.

Sure, if there was a `<card>` element, that would be a better fit, but the definition of an `<aside>` is broad enough IMO ("indirectly related content") that feature callouts don't seem totally counter to the spirit of the tag.

link
ravenstine 2204 days ago
Asides have nothing to do with document flow.
link
chrismorgan 2204 days ago
“Document flow” was perhaps a poor choice of word because of its overloaded meaning. I meant “the flow of content and writing within the document” rather than the layout term.
link