Is this a correct way to use the <section> tag?
<section id="container">
<section id="outer">
<section id="inner">
</section>
</section>
</section>
I'm trying to work out whether or not I should use only one section id, and leave the other two sections as just divs?
If you are just using these elements to place things in some position / style things, then you should probably be using divs.
Section is really for grouping content that belongs together - you shouldn't really have a section without a title (H1 or similar) element describing what the section contains... a few people have made similar mistakes in the past I think:
http://html5doctor.com/the-section-element/
From the spec:
NOTE: The section element is not a generic container element. When an
element is needed for styling purposes or as a convenience for
scripting, authors are encouraged to use the div element instead. A
general rule is that the section element is appropriate only if the
element's contents would be listed explicitly in the document's
outline.
Having said that, it's perfectly acceptable to nest section elements. Maybe something like:
<section>
<h1>Portishead</h1>
<p>Portishead are a cool band from Bristol</p>
<section>
<h1>Dummy (album)</h1>
<p>some info....</p>
<img src="..." />
</section>
<section>
<h1>Portishead (album)</h1>
<p>some other info info....</p>
<img src="..." />
</section>
</section>
Note:
My answer is severely out-of-date, and no longer contains sound advice given the changes to HTML that have happened in the last decade. I will be leaving this answer as-is for historical context, but please be aware that the structure suggested is not best practice—particularly around the use of the obsolete document outline.
Short answer: The code as you've provided is not semantically valid.
Long answer:
section elements are meant to mark up sections of content. Each section of content (i.e. Introduction, Abstract, content, conclusion) could have subsections.
If you're using those elements for structural purpose, you should be using div elements instead. They are semantically meaningless.
This would be more semantic:
<section id="introduction">
<div id="outer">
<div id="inner">
Some content
</div>
</div>
</section>
This would be a semantic way of marking up nested sections:
<section id="content">
<h1>Fizz Buzz</h1>
<section id="chapter-1">
<h1>Foo bar baz</h1>
...
</section>
<section id="chapter-2">
<h1>Lorem ipsum dolor</h1>
...
</section>
....
</section>
My personal recommendation would be to utilize semantic structure as much as possible when you create HTML5 layouts. As other posters have indicated, nesting section elements is totally acceptable, however you need to just make sure it makes sense to do so.
I personally use a few patterns that I've put together based on some research I've done over the course of the last year or so. The most common situation for using nested section elements is to provide ARIA roles for the main content of the document (see "site layout" example below)
Note: assumes body/html elements are present, etc
Site Layout
<header class="header" role="banner">
....
</header>
<!-- used once per page, implies role="main" -->
<main>
<!-- declares page content to be a document and not a web app -->
<section id="wrapper" role="document">
<section class="hero">
....
</section>
....
<section class="content">
</section>
</section>
</main>
<footer class="footer" role="footer">
....
</footer>
Single-Page Content Layout
Note: This layout applies to a page with a singular/topic/object and isn't suitable for all use cases
<article>
<header>
<h1>Page Headline/Title</h1>
</header>
<section class="page-content">
....
</section>
<!-- if this is a post or something with metadata/authorship info... -->
<footer>
....
</footer>
</article>
I use the tag for the class name on the shell header/footer elements as well as landmark roles to insure I can always distinguish them from other header/footer elements within the page (e.g. easy CSS scoping).
References
role="document" https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/roles#document
A region containing related information that is declared as document content, as opposed to a web application.
"Why the <main> element doesn't need a role attribute": https://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-html-main-element-20121217/
The main element formalises the common practice of identification of the main content section of a document using the id values such as 'content' and 'main'. It also defines an HTML element that embodies the semantics and function of the WAI-ARIA landmark role=main.
"W3.org/Wiki explanation of nesting <section> elements" - https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Using_HTML5_section_element
The section element is a container for document content that has a related theme, and represents the section of a document that is grouped around a general concept. Everything within a section element is related. Also section elements may be nested if necessary. The section element is a generic semantic element, that can be used to combine portions of a document together into discrete units that are related in some way. For example, the section element may create items inside an outline of a document, or divide page content into related pieces (like an Introduction) followed by some background information on the topic.
A useful way to think through this is to consider how a screen reader would see your site. Imagine (and in fact you should test this for yourself) the screenreader announcing the word 'section' before reading the content inside your <section> tag.
If that doesn't make logical sense then maybe you've got your items ordered wrong.
Check out aria region role.
I don't know exactly how screen readers read nested sections but if the logical
sections on your page don't have a hierarchy then your HTML shouldn't either.
eg. (this is meant to represent HTML structure)
GOOD
section aria-label="dogs"
section aria-label="labradors"
section aria-labels="terriers"
section aria-label="cats"
section aria-label="sphynx"
section aria-label="persian"
BAD
Section used solely to group two other sections, but without a real meaning of its own as a 'section'.
section style="display: flex; flex-direction: row"
section aria-label="news"
section aria-labels="sport"
HTML5 also allows for setups such as:
<section>
<header>Header of section</header>
<aside><ul><li></li></ul></aside><!-- previously known as sidebar -->
<footer>Footer of section</footer>
</section>
multiple times on the same page, so you don't have just the one header, it goes a lot deeper than this, but it's worth checking out.
Check out the http://gsnedders.html5.org/outliner/
An updated method (as far as I understand it) could be something like this:
<main id="content">
<div id="inner-wrapper">
<section>
<h1>Section Title</h1>
...
</section>
<section>
<h1>Section Title</h1>
...
</section>
</div>
</main>
main {
width: 100%;
...
...
}
#inner_wrapper {
max-width: 80%;
margin: 0 auto;
}
See: http://www.w3.org/TR/html-main-element/, http://www.sitepoint.com/html5-main-element/ or http://html5doctor.com/the-main-element/ for more info.
Related
With HTML 5 new semantic tags were introduced which includes header and footer.
But i am confused what should i use and why?
Use header tag directly or give class="header".Which one is better and why?
Use <header> and those semantic tags.
Why? Because they are meaningful, easier to read.
For example, consider
<header id="article-header">
...
</header>
and
<div id="article-header" class="header">
...
</div>
As you can see the first is shorter, and easier to read.
According to Inbound now, semantic tags are better in terms of SEO too.
Also, this and this question have interesting answers
Edit:
I'm quoting this from MDN:
Some of the benefits from writing semantic markup are as follows:
Search engines will consider its contents as important keywords to influence the page's search rankings (see SEO)
Screen readers can use it as a signpost to help visually impaired users navigate a page
Finding blocks of meaningful code is significantly easier than searching though endless divs with or without semantic or namespaced classes
Suggests to the developer the type of data that will be populated
Semantic naming mirrors proper custom element/component naming
Additionally, I have read somewhere quite some time ago that semantic tags are for defining the outline of the document, divs are more suitable for visual sectioning like box styling (I'm unable to find the source right now).
In CSS Definition
Class contruction:
. means a class
.header{
...........
}
HTML
<div class=header>
..........
<div>
while the header tag
This is calling the element name itself like body or any
header{
.............
}
HTML
<header>
................
</header>
It's better to use header tags. The header element represents a container for an introductory content or a set of navigational links. header tag has a block scope as same scope as a normal div tag .
<html>
<body>
<article>
<header>
<h1>Most important heading here</h1>
<h3>Less important heading here</h3>
<p>Some additional information here.</p>
</header>
<p>Lorem Ipsum dolor set amet....</p>
</article>
</body>
</html>
For example, if I want to put h1 in a left column and content in a right column:
<div class="left-column">
<main>
<h1>Document Title</h1>
</main>
</div>
<div class="right-column">
<main>
<p>Text content<p>
</main>
</div>
Is it correct? Thanks!
The short answer is yes, you can. However, the W3C spec forbids it while the WHATWG spec allows it. As the author of the main element wrote the W3C version and is at odds with WHATWG's interpretation, I would defer there. There is also an open bug to have the WHATWG spec align with the W3C spec.
However, you SHOULD NOT as the best use of main involves supporting assistive technology (AT) (screen readers, for example). It also maps to the ARIA role of main, so it has a direct mapping expectation.
AT users have a quick way to navigate to the main element, which represents the main content of the page. If you use more than one, then those users may never see it as they do not expect there to be more than one block of main content (the WHATWG bug report bears this out as stated by AT users).
Also the HTML validator will throw an error, which may or may not be a concern.
In most cases, multiple article elements can be nested within a main to achieve the desired effect for styling hooks.
I don't have enough rep points to post more than 2 links, else I'd offer some more material.
I think not - There must not be more than one <main> element in a document. The <main> element must NOT be a descendant of an <article>, <aside>, <footer>, <header>, or <nav> element.
it can only be use once per page. see this link here
http://html5doctor.com/the-main-element/
For more info about why. Take a look at this one
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2013Jan/0230.html
Here is the Alignment
<div class="left-column">
<main>
<h1 align="left">Document Title</h1>
</main>
</div>
<div class="right-column">
<main>
<p align="right">Text content<p>
</main>
</div>
Plot: When building a coupons website I realize that their can be content that is not unique to the page but should be used inside the <main><article> ..here..</article></main>.
Problem: Just because w3schools state :
The content inside the element should be unique to the
document. It should not contain any content that is repeated across
documents.
But i have content which will be inside article. Like every time for example A coupon can be used by entering its code but a deal can only be activated by going to landing page.
This will be repeated in every 'coupon' post I will publish.
So now what I tried to use was.
<main><article><main>Unique content</main>
<aside>A coupon can be used by entering its code but a deal can only be activated by going to landing page</aside></article></main>
But again :
Note: There must not be more than one <main> element in a document.
The <main> element must NOT be a descendent of an <article>, <aside>,
<footer>, <header>, or <nav> element.
So what is the best way to format the UN-UNIQUE content inside <main> and/or <article>.
The main tag should be used to group those article and aside elements.
<main>
<article>
The unique document content.
</article>
<aside>
Related content for that document.
</aside>
</main>
tl;dr - use your common sense :)
This article on the actual w3 site has a good overview of what should go where. The overall structure is:
<body>
<header>
<!-- header content goes in here -->
</header>
<nav>
<!-- navigation menu goes in here -->
</nav>
<section id="sidebar1">
<!-- sidebar content goes in here -->
</section>
<main>
<!-- main page content goes in here -->
</main>
<aside>
<!-- aside content goes in here -->
</aside>
<footer>
<!-- footer content goes in here -->
</footer>
</body>
Option 1 - <section>s
They go on to say that <section>s, fairly obviously, can contain multiple <articles>, but that it is also possible to put <section>s inside an <article>, for example to define the introduction or summary:
<article>
<section id="introduction">
</section>
<section id="content">
</section>
<section id="summary">
</section>
</article>
So one option is to put a <section id="content"> and <section id="terms"> inside your article.
Option 2 - <footer>s
It does appear valid to use a <footer> for this sort of content. You said it is just for author, date, category, but w3 states in its spec for <footer>:
A footer typically contains information about its section such as who wrote it, links to related documents, copyright data, and the like.
Your text is terms and conditions of a coupon, which could be considered as semantically similar to copyright data. It's a judgement call I think.
Option 3 - <div>s et al...
As a get-out, in the first link they do also say about <div>s:
You should use [a div] when there is no other more suitable element available for grouping an area of content...
So if it really isn't clear what to use, another possibility could be:
<article>
Blah blah
<div class="terms"></div>
</article>
Summary
To be honest, after all this, it seems there is no definitive answer and sites are unlikely to become super-strict in how they semantically parse documents for a while yet, because they know there are legions of people out there who will do it completely wrong. If you just stick a <p> with the same terms in at the end of each article, it probably won't make any real difference because the main text is unique.
I personally think as long as you use your common sense and choose something which doesn't completely go against the recommendations, you can't go too wrong.
According to the WHATWG (the informal group behind the HTML Living Document Standard), there is no problem in using a main element inside an article. The HTML Living Document says:
There is no restriction as to the number of main elements in a document. Indeed, there are many cases where it would make sense to have multiple main elements. For example, a page with multiple article elements might need to indicate the dominant contents of each such element.
Consequently, you can write
<body>
<header>My Page Header</header>
<main>
<article><h1>My First Article</h1>
<main>My first article's content...</main>
<aside>A sidebar</aside>
</article>
<article><h1>My Second Article</h1>
<main>My second article's content...</main>
<aside>Another sidebar</aside>
</article>
</main>
</body>
However, the W3C HTML 5.3 Draft disallows this and states that "There must not be more than one visible main element in a document."
This is an interesting case of a disagreement about a central element of HTML. Amazing! It seems that there is again a schism between W3C authors and the web/browser developer professionals behind the WHATWG. In such a case, I would go with the WHATWG.
I would go with something like this :
<main>
<div class='article'>
<article>Unique content</article>
<footer>This coupon can be used only once..</footer>
</div>
<div class='article'>
<article>Unique content</article>
<footer>This coupon can be used only once..</footer>
</div>
</main>
Anyway I think having multiple <main> tags is worse than having non-unique content in an <article> tag.
You can also take into consideration Schema.org for proper mapping your content with additional attributes ( itemprop ... )
Should <main> be considered something important to put inside <section>? Like having many articles with <main> 'article' in <section>? If not then how to use them together?
From the HTML5 specs :
Authors must not include more than one main element in a document.
Authors must not include the main element as a descendant of an
article, aside, footer, header or nav element.
The main element represents the main content of the body of a document
or application.
So you should use main as a delimiter of your main content of your website and use article or sections inside main as a delimiter of context, here is a sample of how to handle main :
<main>
<h1>Skateboards</h1>
<p>The skateboard is the way cool kids get around</p>
<article>
<h2>Longboards</h2>
<p>Longboards are a type of skateboard with a longer
wheelbase and larger, softer wheels.</p>
<p>... </p>
<p>... </p>
</article>
<article>
<h2>Electric Skateboards</h2>
<p>These no longer require the propelling of the skateboard
by means of the feet; rather an electric motor propels the board,
fed by an electric battery.</p>
<p>... </p>
<p>... </p>
</article>
</main>
NB : Authors are encouraged to use the article element instead of the section element when it would make sense to syndicate the contents of the element.
Quoting the HTML5 Spec again:
Authors are advised to use ARIA role="main" attribute on the main
element until user agents implement the required role mapping.
HTML5 doctor, though somewhat outdated, does provide a useful working example of the main element:
<main id="content" class="group">
<!-- [...] -->
</main>
In short, the main element should be used whenever possible (but only once per page). Alternatively, you can use role="main" on a sectioning element with the exact same results in terms of WAI-ARIA. Read more about WAI-ARIA roles in my post. For example:
<div class="main-content-column">
<article role="main" id="content">
[...]
</article>
</div>
I don't see how assigning the role="main" to a section element could be semantic at all, but there may be use cases. Generally, you'll want to use the article tag to identify main content. The above snippet provides the exact same semantic information as <main> (note that declaring role="main" on a <main> element is not required by modern screen readers and user agents).
The main tag should be for the main content on the page.
I'm setting up my WordPress sidebars for an HTML5 theme and really wanting to use before_widget and after_widget right.
So my question is this: which of the two markup patterns is more appropriate? The following code is all completely outside the <article> element.
Option 1: Aside with sections
<aside id="sidebar">
<section id="widget_1"></section>
<section id="widget_2"></section>
<section id="widget_3"></section>
</aside>
Option 2: Div with Asides
<div id="sidebar">
<aside id="widget_1"></aside>
<aside id="widget_1"></aside >
<aside id="widget_1"></aside >
</div>
I suppose the auxiliary question is then what heading to use for each widget title. If I wrap each widget in a <section> then <h1> seems most appropriate. If I use <aside>, I'm not sure.
All opinions welcome. Devil's advocates encouraged.
First of all ASIDE is to be used only to denote related content to main content, not for a generic sidebar. Second, one aside for each sidebar only
You will have only one aside for each sidebar. Elements of a sidebar are divs or sections inside a aside.
I would go with Option 1: Aside with sections
<aside id="sidebar">
<section id="widget_1"></section>
<section id="widget_2"></section>
<section id="widget_3"></section>
</aside>
Here is the spec https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/aside
Again use section only if they have a header or footer in them, otherwise use a plain div.
Update 17/07/27: As this is the most-voted answer, I should update this to include current information locally (with links to the references).
From the spec [1]:
The aside element represents a section of a page that consists of
content that is tangentially related to the content of the parenting
sectioning content, and which could be considered separate from that
content. Such sections are often represented as sidebars in printed
typography.
Great! Exactly what we're looking for. In addition, it is best to check on <section> as well.
The section element represents a generic section of a document or
application. A section, in this context, is a thematic grouping of
content. Each section should be identified, typically by including a
heading (h1-h6 element) as a child of the section element.
...
A general rule is that the section element is appropriate only if the element’s contents would be listed explicitly in the document’s outline.
Excellent. Just what we're looking for. As opposed to <article> [2] which is for "self-contained" content, <section> allows for related content that isn't stand-alone, or generic enough for a <div> element.
As such, the spec seems to suggest that using Option 1, <aside> with <section> children is best practice.
References
https://www.w3.org/TR/html51/sections.html#the-aside-element
https://www.w3.org/TR/html51/sections.html#elementdef-article
http://html5doctor.com/aside-revisited/
Look at the following example, from the HTML5 specification about aside.
It makes clear that what currently is recommended (October 2012) it is to group widgets inside aside elements. Then, each widget is whatever best represents it, a nav, a serie of blockquotes, etc
The following extract shows how aside can be used for blogrolls and
other side content on a blog:
<body>
<header>
<h1>My wonderful blog</h1>
<p>My tagline</p>
</header>
<aside>
<!-- this aside contains two sections that are tangentially related
to the page, namely, links to other blogs, and links to blog posts
from this blog -->
<nav>
<h1>My blogroll</h1>
<ul>
<li>Example Blog
</ul>
</nav>
<nav>
<h1>Archives</h1>
<ol reversed>
<li>My last post
<li>My first post
</ol>
</nav>
</aside>
<aside>
<!-- this aside is tangentially related to the page also, it
contains twitter messages from the blog author -->
<h1>Twitter Feed</h1>
<blockquote cite="http://twitter.example.net/t31351234">
I'm on vacation, writing my blog.
</blockquote>
<blockquote cite="http://twitter.example.net/t31219752">
I'm going to go on vacation soon.
</blockquote>
</aside>
<article>
<!-- this is a blog post -->
<h1>My last post</h1>
<p>This is my last post.</p>
<footer>
<p><a href="/last-post" rel=bookmark>Permalink</a>
</footer>
</article>
<article>
<!-- this is also a blog post -->
<h1>My first post</h1>
<p>This is my first post.</p>
<aside>
<!-- this aside is about the blog post, since it's inside the
<article> element; it would be wrong, for instance, to put the
blogroll here, since the blogroll isn't really related to this post
specifically, only to the page as a whole -->
<h1>Posting</h1>
<p>While I'm thinking about it, I wanted to say something about
posting. Posting is fun!</p>
</aside>
<footer>
<p><a href="/first-post" rel=bookmark>Permalink</a>
</footer>
</article>
<footer>
<nav>
Archives —
About me —
Copyright
</nav>
</footer>
</body>
Based on this HTML5 Doctor diagram, I'm thinking this may be the best markup:
<aside class="sidebar">
<article id="widget_1" class="widget">...</article>
<article id="widget_2" class="widget">...</article>
<article id="widget_3" class="widget">...</article>
</aside> <!-- end .sidebar -->
I think it's clear that <aside> is the appropriate element as long as it's outside the main <article> element.
Now, I'm thinking that <article> is also appropriate for each widget in the aside. In the words of the W3C:
The article element represents a self-contained composition in a
document, page, application, or site and that is, in principle,
independently distributable or reusable, e.g. in syndication. This
could be a forum post, a magazine or newspaper article, a blog entry,
a user-submitted comment, an interactive widget or gadget, or any
other independent item of content.
The book HTML5 Guidelines for Web Developers: Structure and Semantics for Documents suggested this way (option 1):
<aside id="sidebar">
<section id="widget_1"></section>
<section id="widget_2"></section>
<section id="widget_3"></section>
</aside>
It also points out that you can use sections in the footer. So section can be used outside of the actual page content.
I'm surprised that none of the responses above consider responsive design.
I may have valid aside elements such as a tag cloud, links for further reading and so on together, one after the other, in my sidebar when my page is viewed on a desktop device.
However, when my page is reduced on a mobile device to a single column then I will be separating those elements. My navigation element will go between my header and main content elements, and links for further reading will go below the main content element, above the footer.
As the semantic content of these elements is not changing with the width of the display window, then they need to be individually marked up as aside elements.
It follows then, that the sidebar itself should not be marked up as an aside element, even when it only contains content of one type.
In turn, this means that Option 1 in the original question must be undesirable (wrong?) and that the better answer should be Option 2.
The ASIDE has since been modified to include secondary content as well.
HTML5 Doctor has a great writeup on it here:
http://html5doctor.com/aside-revisited/
Excerpt:
With the new definition of aside, it’s crucial to remain aware of its context. >When used within an article element, the contents should be specifically related >to that article (e.g., a glossary). When used outside of an article element, the >contents should be related to the site (e.g., a blogroll, groups of additional >navigation, and even advertising if that content is related to the page).