- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 16:33:05 +0000 (UTC)
- To: "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>
- Cc: whatwg <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>
On Fri, 19 Oct 2012, Jukka K. Korpela wrote: > > > > Are there any situations that this doesn't handle where it would be > > legitimate to omit a <title> element? > > Perhaps the simplest case is an HTML document that is only meant to be > displayed inside an inline frame and containing, say, just a numeric > table. It is not meant to be found and indexed by search engines, it is > not supposed to be rendered as a standalone document with a browser top > bar (or equivalent) showing its title, etc. The initial intent of such a document may be to only display it in a frame, but since it's independently addressable, nothing stops a search engine from referencing it, a user from bookmarking it, etc. So I don't think that's an example of where omitting <title> is a good idea. > The current wording looks OK to me, and it to me, it says that a title > is not needed when the document is not to be used out of context: > > "The title element represents the document's title or name. Authors > should use titles that identify their documents even when they are used > out of context, for example in a user's history or bookmarks, or in > search results." > http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#the-title-element That isn't what that says. Please make sure never to read between the lines when reading a specification. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Friday, 19 October 2012 16:33:31 UTC