W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > September 1998

Re: ID and NAME

From: Sue Jordan <sjacct@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 1998 12:24:17 -0400
Message-ID: <35ED7131.9167F17A@worldnet.att.net>
To: www-html@w3.org
C:Nicholas Owens asserted:
> 
> those validators can give you the funniest responses.  w3 has never been
> in favor of image rollovers or anything else on the edge of dynamics.

That's DAFT (1). Intrinsic events are included in HTML 4.0:
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/interact/scripts.html#events

> it will work on all of the new browsers but w3 won't recognize the
> attribute for silly reasons.  

Silly? That 'name' isn't an attribute of IMG is silly? 

> they ignore it for the sake of ignoring
> it.  

The antecedent of 'they' is unclear. If 'they' refers to the W3C
validator, the illegal attribute is flagged as an error, not ignored. If
'they' refers to the W3C not implementing name as an attribute of IMG,
I'm sure it's because you haven't argued your case for inclusion in a
clear and convincing manner. Go ahead. 

> don't use ID b/c it won't work unless you've written the script
> that way.  use NAME but don't expect w3 to like it.  

YM the W3C validator will continue to flag it as an error?

> in fact, they might
> kick you out fo this discussion group for mentioning such activity, no
> matter how remote.

That's a fairly serious allegation to make. This is a public list and my
experience has been that no censorship is implemented, regardless of the
inanity of a post. 

Sue
(1)DAFT: adj. phrase, initialism - Deranged Assertion Foolishly Tendered
Received on Wednesday, 2 September 1998 12:23:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:37 GMT