Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [NH] ID/Target # => will not work in FF 2.0.9

Expand Messages
  • WV-Mike
    ... Hi Axel, To be sure I know what you mean: A semantic tag would be , etc and unsemantic element would be
    Message 1 of 12 , Nov 8, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      At 06:39 AM 11/8/2007 , Axel Berger wrote:
      >WV-Mike wrote:
      > > To be on the safe side I will use both ID and NAME hence forth.
      >
      >I wouldn't if it was me. The decided advantage of the ID is, that you
      >can add it to any existing semantic tag, while the <a name needs to be a
      >separate unsemantic element. So a very good case can be made for getting
      >rid of it. Once you value backwards compatibility enough to retain it, I
      >can see no advatage whatever of an additional ID, unless you address it
      >through CSS or script.

      Hi Axel,
      To be sure I know what you mean:

      A semantic tag would be <p>, etc and
      unsemantic element would be <img and ???

      If I am understanding you correctly you are saying ID is the one to use in
      "all cases" since it can be using "anywhere".
      Please excuse my generalizations.

      -Mike
    • WV-Mike
      ... I wanted to revisit the necessity of using ALT tags . ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt_attribute Alternative text is especially useful in the
      Message 2 of 12 , Nov 8, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        At 11:33 AM 11/7/2007 , you wrote:
        >N.B: Your page is terrible with graphics turned off and there are no ALT
        >tags. I get 28 validation errors and 3 warnings.


        I wanted to revisit the necessity of using ALT "tags".

        Reading this:
        ----
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt_attribute
        "Alternative text is especially useful in the following situations:

        * For people with low bandwidth connections, who may opt not to load
        graphics
        * For people using handheld devices
        * For people with disabilities who use assistive technology, such as
        refreshable braille displays or screen readers
        * For people using a pay per transferred data connection
        * Search engine optimization: most search engines interpret the
        meaning of objects by analysing their alt attribute"

        And this:
        http://htmlhelp.com/feature/art3.htm
        "Why should authors bother with ALT texts?

        Well, from the fact that you're reading this article, I hope you already
        think it's a good idea, but I have written some notes [3] on this topic.

        Some of the biggest "casualties" on the information dirt-track are
        documents whose authors didn't take the indexing robots seriously. Every
        step that you take towards text-mode accessibility is, at the same time, a
        step towards being friendly to those indexing robots, so (whether or not
        you care about minority audiences such as the blind or users of text mode
        terminals) I'd say it's in your own interest to keep text-mode
        accessibility in mind. "
        ----

        These gave me some food for thought about not using ALT text in my pages.
        My previous post on this was a justification for not using them because I
        felt all the info needed was in the text comments, quotes and links.
        This seemed to me to make using ALT text superfluous.

        But, search engine optimization does seem to be reason enough to use ALT text.

        I wish I had a better idea how useful sight impaired users find ALT tag info.

        I can't end this without stating another reason I stopped using ALT text.
        Laziness.
        All my pages have lots of images and I just never seemed to get around to
        adding the ALT text because it was too much trouble and slowed the already
        sluggish pace at which I work.

        -Mike

        p.s. Is the "N.B:" above an abbreviation for nota bene, a latin expression
        meaning "note well"? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NB
        I confess to being ignorant as to it's meaning.
      • Axel Berger
        ... No, a semantic element is one, that tells you something about the content and must or should be there irrespective of layout like: this is a paragraph this
        Message 3 of 12 , Nov 8, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          WV-Mike wrote:
          > A semantic tag would be <p>, etc and
          > unsemantic element would be <img and ???

          No, a semantic element is one, that tells you something about the
          content and must or should be there irrespective of layout like:
          this is a paragraph
          this is a heading
          this is an image
          this is a table (of tabular data)
          this is a list
          and also this is a link to something else

          Unsemantic are all elements that are there for reasons of layout rather
          than content, i.e. all DIVs and SPANs, tables if they're there for
          layout, and of course all deprecated nonsense like FONT or CENTER (I
          sometimes use the latter to cater for browsers without styleshets).
          Internal anchors are a borderline case, but no doubt an ID attribute
          inside a tag, that needs to be there anyway, makes for cleaner code.

          In HTML I'm often pulled both ways by the two important rules I try to
          comply to:
          1) Always write totally standards conformant code and shun anything
          deprecated or proprietary.
          2) Never use anything newer than you absolutely have to to achieve your
          goal. Always be compatible to the oldest version of anything that your
          content allows.

          Axel
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.