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

Re: H1

From: Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 15:13:54 -0800
To: "Philip TAYLOR [PC336/H-XP]" <P.Taylor@rhul.ac.uk>, Nigel Peck - MIS Web Design <nigel@miswebdesign.com>
CC: <www-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BA70151B.20EF8%tantek@cs.stanford.edu>

It seems a waste of a perfectly fine heading level to simply use it as a
surrogate for a previous element.

I think this kind of semantic hierarchy is fine for an html document:

Good:

title
  h1
   h2
   h2
   h2
  h1
   h2
   h2
   h2

etc. (fill in the implied html, head, body, div, p elements as needed).

And that more often than not, it would be a mistake to do this:

Less good:

title
h1
  h2
   h3
   h3
   h3
  h2
   h3
   h3
   h3


Tantek

On 2/12/03 2:12 PM, "Philip TAYLOR [PC336/H-XP]" <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
wrote:

> 
> Yes, we usually do the same here :
> 
> <title> = "Royal Holloway : <contents of H1>"
> <h1> = "<whatever>
> 
> but there are cases (admittedly far less common), where
> <title> does not echo <h1>, and there are two or more
> <h1>s.
> 
> ** Phil.
> --------
> Nigel Peck - MIS Web Design wrote:
>> 
>> As I said "semantically the same or near enough".
>> 
>> For example, on my site I have a format like this:
>> 
>> <title>MIS Web Design: Title of this document</title>
>> 
>> <h1>Title of this document</h1>
>> 
>> The <title> may be used to add additional information that helps with
>> indexing in bookmarks lists, search engine results etc. Further information
>> that is more site related than document related but semantically they are
>> the same in relation to the content of that page.
>> 
>> Nigel
> 
Received on Wednesday, 12 February 2003 18:01:35 GMT

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