- From: Jonas Jørgensen <jonasj@jonasj.dk>
- Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2002 17:49:32 +0200
- To: Chris Mannall <chris.mannall@hecubagames.com>
- Cc: www-html@w3.org
Chris Mannall wrote: > I wrote: > >As a somewhat related aside, why is the Hypertext attribute collection > >used so liberally? What is the intended meaning of e.g.: > > > > <em href="http://www.example.com/"> > > this, > > </em> > > To which Jonny Axelsson replied: > >For most purposes equivalent to: > > <em><a href="http://www.example.com/">this,</a></em> > > I wrote: > >surely this would make the 'a' element somewhat redundant? > > To which Jonny Axelsson replied: > >It would make the a element entirely redundant. > > This isn't strictly true; only the a element retains the hreflang, type, > charset, rel, and rev attributes, all of which (arguably) add value. I'd > especially lament the loss of 'rel' and 'rev' were a to be deleted > entirely; although browser support for these attributes is limited (to > put it politely), these attributes are potentially very useful. So the a > element still has its place. rel and rev attributes also apply to the link element. See <http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/mod-link.html>. > In addition, in quickly checking up on the attributes named above, I > believe I've come across an error in the spec; section 9.1 contains the > following example: > > <a name="anchor-one">This is the location of anchor one.</a> That is an error, and it has already been reported to www-html-editor: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2002JulSep/0052.html -- I have switched banks and indicated as reason for closing the account that their home page is not w3c compliant. - Hugo Van Woerkom
Received on Thursday, 8 August 2002 11:48:22 UTC