Re: noscript validation issue

Dammit you are right! I really should spend less time concentrating on the 
back end of my apps and put some thought into the front end. 

Anyhow, it looks like I will have go off and eradicate <NOSCRIPT> form my 
HTML templates. Again thanks for the invaluable tip! 

Paul 

David Dorward writes: 

> On Sat, Feb 05, 2005 at 09:49:17AM +0000, Paul Mackinlay wrote:
>  
>> Having looked into this, a practival alternative to wrapping <noscript> 
>> tags within <p> tags is using <div> instead of <p>.
> 
> Generally speaking, <noscript> is a poor solution to any problem,
> especially when it means throwning away semantics in order to
> validate. 
> 
> The big problem with noscript is that is only allows for two possible
> states - scripting supported or scripting not supported. It doesn't
> allow for the possibility that scripting is supported by the script
> makes use of scripting features not available in all browsers. 
> 
> Generally the better solution is to write the document as if scripting
> was not available, and then use scripting to alter the existing HTML. 
> 
> In cases where you really want to use <noscript>, the better solution
> is probably to write out the entire paragraph using JavaScript, and
> then have another entire paragraph inside the <noscript> block.
>  
>> For those of you that make substantial use of CSS, you can create a CSS 
>> class with the dot notation and use it in the class attribute on the 
>> <div> tag.
> 
> Technically speaking it is an HTML class with a CSS "class selector",
> but <div class="paragraph"> makes for a very poor substitute for <p>. 
> 
> -- 
> David Dorward                                      http://dorward.me.uk 
>

Received on Saturday, 5 February 2005 10:38:58 UTC