W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > September 2000

RE: ISO HTML and headings

From: Dave J Woolley <david.woolley@bts.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 06:48:28 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <81E4A2BC03CED111845100104B62AFB5824A09@stagecoach.bts.co.uk>
To: www-html@w3.org
> From:	Masayasu Ishikawa [SMTP:mimasa@w3.org]
> As you may guess, this constraints have "side effect", e.g. you
> cannot use DIV to apply styles that cover a heading and its following
> section ... you may find another "side effect" in forms.
[DJW:]  I'd consider this a major problem, not a mere
side effect.  Current best practice is to use tables
instead of frames for layout (does ISO HTML have frames?)
and theoretical best practice is to use fixed or 
absolutely positioned divisions (until NS 4 goes out
of circulation, this is not a realistic option).

That means that headings will be subordinate to TD or
DIV in well written W3C HTML 4 documents, which use the
commecially expected graphical idioms.

As it is, you can get past both Bobby (without violating
single A accessibility) and validator.w3.org whilst not
having a single Hn element, even when there are many logical
headings (e.g. <http://www.setileague.org/> is a relatively
clean++ page that uses FONT instead of Hn and passes the above
tests; I can't convince them to use Hn for headings and LI for

By forcing an element that people are already failing to use
(properly or at all) to be used only directly below BODY, they 
are finally killing Hn, rather than encouraging its proper use.

[DJW:]  ++ It was better, but got the Javascript and table
--------------------------- DISCLAIMER ---------------------------------
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender,
except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of BTS.
Received on Monday, 25 September 2000 14:39:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:54 UTC