- From: James Graham <jg307@cam.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:29:47 +0100
Simon Pieters wrote: > On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 13:50:18 +0200, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote: > >> Every now and then, the issue of a global href="" attribute for all >> elements comes up. There are many valid use cases for this, like being >> able to make all cells in a table row act like a link, or making a banner >> ad act like a single block of a link. >> >> Unfortunately, I've been told over and over by implementers that a global >> href="" is a bad idea, and at the end of the day, the implementors are >> the >> ones who have the final say, so that's just a non-starter. >> >> There are also alternative suggestions, like making <a> contain any >> element. Unfortunately, none of these end up working (e.g. for this >> proposal, <a><p></a> would create an unexpected DOM -- we'd have to make >> </p> end tags not optional when the next end tag was an </a>, which would >> be somewhat confusing). > > The rules for optional end tags are already pretty confusing. I don't > think it's a problem to require </p> when the "p" element is the last > child of an "a" element. > I think <table><a><tr> also causes problems; being able to link whole table rows seems like one of the major use cases for this proposal. Would the implementor feedback that global href is a bad idea still apply if instead of "global" it was "large set of elements" where the large set would explicitly not include things like form elements? -- "Eternity's a terrible thought. I mean, where's it all going to end?" -- Tom Stoppard, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead
Received on Wednesday, 30 July 2008 06:29:47 UTC