4 ms·
> 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 ne
by awb 6y 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/ https://andybrewer.github.io/mvp/
- chrismorgan 6y agoI 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.
- awb 6y agoI don't think it's that dissimilar to Mozilla's usage here: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/aside#Using_%3Caside%3E 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.
- ravenstine 6y agoAsides have nothing to do with document flow.
- chrismorgan 6y 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.