W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > July to September 2004

Re: [#925] mandatory H1

From: Michele Diodati <michele@diodati.org>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 17:25:19 +0200
Message-Id: <200408261523.i7QFNADg061970@mail5.mclink.it>
To: "w3c-wai-gl" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

Yvette Hoitink wrote:

>For example assume I have a website to teach children about the Frisian
>language (a minority language in the Netherlands). I have a section with
>nursery rhymes and I include two versions side by side: a Dutch version and
>a Frisian version. I give the Dutch version a Dutch title with an H1 and the
>Frisian version a Frisian title with an H1. Having them side-by-side instead
>of two separate pages actually helps people in understanding the content so
>helps accessibility for some groups. The other way to have this content with
>just 1 H1 would be to create an artificial extra header which I do not think
>benefits anyone.

It is a good example, but it is not an example of what I meant (two or more blocks of content, each starting with a H1 and totally independent from the others). Really the Dutch version and the Frisian one are coordinate blocks of information. So, it seems to me appropriate they stay on the same page, and not useless to provide a unitary heading for both the versions (e.g. <h1>Dutch and Frisian version side-by-side</h1>), lowering the individual headings of the two versions to H2 level. 

However, I don't think that using only one H1 in a web page is indeed essential for accessibility in any situation. I only think that organizing information in a way at the same time hierarchical and homogeneous is in general better, and this implies the effort to arrange contents in a tree-shaped way, with only one root (H1) and as many branches (H2...H6) as we need.

Michele Diodati
http://www.diodati.org
Received on Thursday, 26 August 2004 15:23:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:17:58 UTC