Better ad placement than <aside>

Question

I really enjoyed it when I read this on the Mozilla Publisher Network :

In HTML4, each section is part of the outline of the document. But documents are often not linear. A document may have special sections containing information that is not part, although it is related to, the main stream, as an ad unit or an explanatory unit. HTML5 introduces the <aside> element , which prevents such sections from being part of the main plan.

I felt equally superior when I came across this HTML5 Doctor :

Navigation, ads, search fields, blogs, etc. are not directly related to this article, and therefore do not justify the use of <aside> .

As such, after quite a lot of googling, I realized that people have different opinions. Some agree to using <aside> for content such as ads, but others do not.

The main problem: I create a technology blog, and from the very beginning I wanted the pages (including articles) to be complete. This gives me a little chance to place an ad in it (Google really does not like the “ads” between the contents of the article).

And when I came across the <aside> element, I thought I hit the gold mine until I saw mixed opinions about its use for advertising.

So the question is, can someone knowledgeable shed some light on whether <aside> can be used for advertising? Also, are there semantic alternatives (element or markup)?

Answer 1

Here's what the spec says :

A pending element is a section of a page that consists of content regarding content around the element and which can be considered separate from that content. Such sections are often presented as side panels in a print shop.

An element can be used for typographic effects, such as pulling quotes or sidebars, for advertising, for groups of navigation elements, and for other content that is considered separate from the main content of the page.

Leaving aside the fact that advertising is referred to as OK in the second paragraph, the source of the confusion is clear. These two paragraphs are somewhat controversial.

The first paragraph states that it should be used for content tangent to and , considered separately from the main content.

The second paragraph requires that the content be considered separate main content.

I suspect this confusion has arisen due to the choice of an “aside” name that has a “tangential relationship” to the connotation in English, while an alternate rejected name for an element that was a “sidebar” does not.

I'm not quite sure why the “sidebar” was rejected, but perhaps it was considered too presentation and not meaningful enough. Unfortunately, when choosing "to the side", the author introduced semantics, which in fact were not intended and were not useful.

Fortunately, in this case we do not need to decipher this contradiction. Advertisements are specifically called suitable for <aside> , so the problem is clearly resolved.

Answer 2

While I'm still waiting for an answer, I found a reputable source for W3, stating that <aside> may contain advertisements.

Content Example

• pull quotes
• side panels
• advertising
• groups of navigation items.

etc .. Other content that is considered separate from the main content of the page.

UPDATE: In the editorial of his article on using the “aside” element, HTML5 Doctor states this :

With the new definition of aside , it is important to know its context. When used inside an article element, the content should be specifically related to this article (for example, a glossary). When used outside the article element, the content should be linked to the site (for example, a blog roll, additional navigation groups, and even advertising if this content is linked to the page).

Unfortunately, I don’t understand how they came to this conclusion, because the HTML5 specification for aside does NOT contain anything as such and specifically.

In fact, as I already quoted above, I believe that if the aside in the article may contain pull quotes, they can be advertised (W3C does not specifically share their use cases, and I believe that if it should be that way).

PS: I contacted the HTML5 doctor about this question and will update the answer if I get an answer.

Answer 3

This is the most relevant aside output I've come across:

The aside element can now represent secondary content when used outside of article . Keep in mind that aside - and, more generally, secondary content - does not necessarily mean “sidebar”. Style content should not dictate the use of the element. For content, this is not the main focus on the article (or page), but still related to the article (or page), aside - what you need regardless of its visual design.

Link: http://html5doctor.com/aside-revisited/

Basically, it depends on whether you use it inside the article or outside it. external to be the best for advertising .. as I read it.