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

Re: Feedback on XHTML 2.0 WD (20030131)

From: Andy H <aholmes84@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 18:35:50 -0700
To: www-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <F105r5qWn3GCIFoPkG000006279@hotmail.com>

>The naughty author can use empty content:
>
><title></title>
>
>That is as useless as the absence of a 'title' element. So the question is
>whether requiring a 'title' element encourages writing an actual title. I
>think that the requirement does encourage good writing, but I would like to
>see evidence supporting or contradicting this assumption.
>

I agree, having the title element manditory for valid markup just encourages 
possible misuse of it simply to validate code not unlike using an empty alt 
attribute in an image element. If the title was defined in a meta tag, maybe 
a default fall-back value for title could be used such as the absolute URI 
of the document or "Untitled".


_________________________________________________________________
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*   
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Received on Friday, 28 March 2003 20:37:17 GMT

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