Re: [whatwg] Character-encoding-related threads

2012-10-19 19:33, Ian Hickson wrote:

> 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.

Anyone who bookmarks a document that was not meant to be bookmarked 
should accept the consequences.

But it seems that it is pointless to present any situations where it 
would be legitimate to omit a <title> element, since you are prepared to 
refuting any possible example by presenting how things could be 
different from the scenario given.

>> "The title element represents the document's title or name.

Yet you seem to deny, a priori, the possibility that a document does not 
need a title or a name.

Yucca

Received on Friday, 19 October 2012 17:49:45 UTC