Re: why TITLE, not TITLE?

Neil St.Laurent (neil@bigpic.com)
Mon, 21 Jul 1997 11:01:53 -0600


Message-Id: <199707211657.KAA00178@underworld.bigpic.com>
From: "Neil St.Laurent" <neil@bigpic.com>
To: www-html@w3.org
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 11:01:53 -0600
Subject: Re: why TITLE, not TITLE?

In the time of 21 Jul 97:12:30, www-html@w3.org pronounced:

> If anyone has any doubt on the necessity of individually naming your
> documents, just check out any kind of documentation on metadata.  Titles
> are an integral part of this metadata, and as such it is necessary to have
> different titles..

If titles are indeed supposed to be unique then should we not 
implement them with a classid such as OBJECT has in order to 
guarantee no two documents have the same title?

While I think distinguishing titles are nice I think the context of a 
document (it's URL or file path possibly) should also help 
distinguish it's true nature.  On our site we use shortened titles to 
avoid such titles as:

<TITLE>Big Picture Multimedia: Mortar: Docs: Developer: Compiler Functions: 
Libraries: Nifty: RainbowText</TITLE>
__
| Mortar: Advanced Web Development <http://bigpic.com/mortar/>
| Neil St.Laurent  neil@bigpic.com
| Big Picture Multimedia