- From: <pewtah@snafu.de>
- Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2006 09:31:31 GMT
- To: 'WebAIM Discussion List' <webaim-forum@list.webaim.org>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Hi Lachlan, > Exactly! Poor use and lack of support is a very good reasons to drop a > feature. That is not my point of view. In the case of the LINK element "lack of support" means for me "there are browsers not supporting all some HTML elements". And "poor use": there are browsers not supporting the LINK element, so a web developer does not implement them. There are so many web sites not providing the LINK element so browsers do not support them. Who should make the first step? It's like a deadlock. Nobody would say "we don't need fire extinguishers because nearly no-one uses them and 99,9% of their lives they are only standing or hanging around". For the case a fire extinguisher is neccessary, or at least helpful, everybody would be happy about it. For me this is the same with the LINK element. Using the navigation bar in Opera browsing in a site is easier, time saving and faster for me (and more in Mozilla because Mozilla supports all link types). For me, the LINK element is the most underestimated HTML tag. If it is present I like to use it and I implement it in my web sites. Martin Stehle www.webaccessibility.de
Received on Sunday, 5 November 2006 09:31:47 UTC