W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > February 2003

RE: H1

From: Nigel Peck - MIS Web Design <nigel@miswebdesign.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 22:07:00 -0000
To: "Sampo Syreeni" <decoy@iki.fi>
Cc: "Philip TAYLOR [PC336/H-XP]" <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>, <www-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BFECLKEDIHDIPFDEBCFNEELADKAA.nigel@miswebdesign.com>

But if they're unrelated shouldn't they be on separate pages in theory?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ssyreeni@cc.helsinki.fi [mailto:ssyreeni@cc.helsinki.fi]On Behalf
> Of Sampo Syreeni
> Sent: 12 February 2003 22:04
> To: Nigel Peck - MIS Web Design
> Cc: Philip TAYLOR [PC336/H-XP]; www-html@w3.org
> Subject: RE: H1
> 
> 
> On 2003-02-12, Nigel Peck - MIS Web Design uttered to Philip TAYLOR...:
> 
> >In that case should it not be given a single <h1> with <h2>s for the 2
> >sections?
> 
> No. If you have two topics of equal importance without a common unifying
> one, you'd label them both and concatenate. If both of the topics are at
> the highest heading level of a page, you'd end up with two parallel H1's.
> -- 
> Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy - mailto:decoy@iki.fi, tel:+358-50-5756111
> student/math+cs/helsinki university, http://www.iki.fi/~decoy/front
> openpgp: 050985C2/025E D175 ABE5 027C 9494 EEB0 E090 8BA9 0509 85C2
Received on Wednesday, 12 February 2003 17:06:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:54 GMT