W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > March 2011

[Bug 12334] make <a name> valid again in HTML5

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2011 06:42:10 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1Q0prW-0003iC-Q9@jessica.w3.org>

--- Comment #3 from Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> 2011-03-19 06:42:09 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)

> Because the spec says that <a> is semantically an hyperlink.

It is only "semantically a hyperlink" - "REPRESENTS a hyperlink" - when it
contains @href:

   "If the a element has an href attribute, **then**
    it represents a hyperlink (a hypertext anchor)."

There is another thing which <a> always is, however: It is always 'interactive
content', even without the @href, see:
But I suppose that you are not after changing *that* detail.

> Turning an html4 <a name> into a <a id> would make it a 
> named anchor, violating the semantics defined in the spec.


   Would that solve you concern if the spec stated that an <a
id="">*</a>(anchor with the @id attribute) "REPRESENTS a named anchor"?

   (I *do* support such a change.)

NOTES to convince the editor (Ian) to make such a specification:

    FIRSTLY:  Spec forbids 'target, rel, media, hreflang, and type'
                   unless @href is present. But @id is not forbidden.
SECONDLY: Spec contains one example where it shows how one
                   can use an <a> element WITHOUT any @href. 
                   PROPOSAL: add @id to that example.
   THIRDLY: @name is actually "obsolete but conforming"
Hence the "old" semantics are actually not clearly unpresent in HTML5.

Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Saturday, 19 March 2011 06:42:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:01:44 UTC