Ok, I can appreciate that you weren’t trying to dismiss. Still, hierarchical size, when it’s separate from semantic order, describes presentation not content, and hence doesn’t belong in HTML. Code HTML for a screenreader. <h1 class=“h2”> doesn’t make semantic sense.
2
1
I would argue the exact opposite. It's much better for the screen readers <h1> says that this is the most important semantic element on the page. .h2 says it should be the size of "heading level 2".
2
2
Size shouldn’t be in HTML. What does size mean to a screen reader, when you’re saying it conflicts with the actual proper semantic order?
2
1
Web these days...maybe I’m too old school. CSSZengarden, WASP, ALA, etc. my heroes were/are @mholzschlag @meyerweb @mezzoblue to me, <h1 class=“h2”> is just wrong 🤷🏻♂️
1
2
I'm not sure if you think I'm some young gun or something, but this is the same way people have been defining type scales since CSS Zen Garden. h1 is semantically the highest level of heading. `.h2` has no semantic meaning and is defining the 2nd largest heading size
2
2
There is nothing "web these days" about this. class="h2" has no semantic meaning. I'm very confused about what your position is here.
1
1
My position is that it’s not semantic markup. You’re exactly right: it has no semantic meaning. It’s correcting for an error in markup or laziness in style code. If it’s an h2, put it in an <h2>. If it’s an <h1> but needs subtle emphasis, code class=“subtle”.
1
Woah woah woah, hold up. My head isn't in this. I was just answering standard headers h1 h2 etc. No conflict please. Not today, not with me. thank you, please, xo/m
Jan 8, 2021 · 9:14 PM UTC
1
2