W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2004

RE: anchors and Bobby

From: R.S.V. <rsv@retemail.es>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 21:19:00 +0100
To: "Chris Lewis" <LewisCM@Cardiff.ac.uk>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>, <jon@hackcraft.net>, <P.H.Lauke@salford.ac.uk>, <charles@sidar.org>, <jon@bunnyfoot.com>

Anchors and Bobby, Summary

Thank you to Chris, P. H. Lauke, Jon Hanna, Jon Dodd and Charles
- ignore Bobby's warning in this case

In my opinion, the best solution.

- change the wording of the headings or the links in the list at
the top of the page (not recommended)

It doesn't work. See: http://www.timon.com/bobby3.html

- use id only to identify the anchors (and lose backwards

I don't want to lose backwards compatibility.

- use an empty anchor (ie <a name="uno"></a>) before each

It doesn´t work. See: http://www.timon.com/bobby4.html

[Jon Hanna]
Why are you using name? Backwards compatibility?

Yes. In Netscape 4.7, relative links doesn't work if anchor is

[Jon Hanna]
BTW. There is no need to use the <a> element when you are using
id, you can put
the id onto any element in the content.

Bobby doesn't report errors with "id" in elements, but we have
the same problem with backwards compatibility. See:

[P. H. Lauke]
"our boss still surfs the interweb powered by Netscrape 4.72"

Some people use browser that doesn't work with "id".

it looks like Bobby has a badly defined test here - i.e. a bug.
I don't
understand what it is picking up, but I don't see any reasonable
argument that the error exists.

I agree with you. I think that is a bug. I'll send a bug report
to Bobby.

[Jon Dodd]
Who cares if bobby flags a thing that is stupid?

Anyone who think that a bug in Bobby is relevant to
accessibility lists. Maybe, some people in accessibility lists
use Bobby and this information is useful for them.

Thank you all.

Ricardo Sánchez
Received on Wednesday, 21 January 2004 15:18:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:27 UTC