W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-evangelist@w3.org > March 2004

Re: Best Practices in HTML Re: The use of W3C standards in Denmark Part II

From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 14:16:38 -0500
Message-Id: <1FAA0C01-7135-11D8-9CF0-000A95718F82@w3.org>
To: public-evangelist@w3.org

Le 08 mars 2004, à 13:36, Bjoern Hoehrmann a écrit :
> Yes, I am not required to use <address> for contact information, I can
> use <p> instead or omit contact information from the document. Is there
> anything in HTML 4.01 that allows to use the <address> element for non-
> contact information (which seems to be your point?)

Yes :)
And it's very important to define what we consider mandatory or not. 
Conformance model of a specification is not easy to do, specifically 
when it comes to the definition of the semantics of the elements and 
their content. And we had comments for the QA Framework that we were 
abusing the RFC 2119 keywords.

I have never seen an XHTML/HTML book explaining how to write HTML not 
by explaining the tags but by explaining the semantics of text and by 
using the appropriate tags when needed. Maybe it will finally come with 
XHTML 2.0.

Though it would be still worthwhile to write one for XHTML 1.0. I 
remember to have discussed the topic in the past with (2 years ago) 
with Molly Holzschlag. (ah... If I had more time).

On the validation topic from a secret informer on my messenger, with 
contenunu  <humour/> secret name has given me these interesting links

	http://www.naarvoren.nl/artikel/high_accessibility.html
	http://fawny.org/blog/2003/09/?fawnyblog#explain



-- 
Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager
*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***

Received on Monday, 8 March 2004 14:16:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 15 July 2011 00:13:22 GMT