- From: Jan Roland Eriksson <jrexon@newsguy.com>
- Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2002 13:52:39 +0200
- To: www-html@w3.org
- Cc: Tim Bagot <tsb-w3-html-0005@earth.li>
On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 09:48:00 +0000 (UTC), you wrote: >At 2002-08-25T09:03+0200, Jan Roland Eriksson wrote:- >> There is nothing wrong with a content-less element (its syntactical >> markup shall be Ok of course) its only a matter of mathematical >> amateurs to grow up and start recognizing 'zero' as a valid value >> among values. >This argument is specious: there is nothing wrong with a contentless >element per se, but an empty section is not the same thing as a separator >between sections. The original discussion, that has trickled down to this part of message exchange, started when I gave three URL's to studies I made quite some time ago to illustrate how to proceed if one wants to display a containing element as fully enclosing a float within it self. <http://css.nu/exp/layer-ex3b.html> <http://css.nu/exp/layer-ex3c.html> <http://css.nu/exp/layer-ex3d.html> I also made it explicitly clear in my original post that "a cluefull author naturally finds good use for the empty space that is available" in my study examples. >There ought to be no need to mark up such a separator explicitly. True, although CSS does specify at least one specific way for how to suggest the inclusions of a line break. Still, at the end of the day we need a combination of clueful authors and good tools if we want to keep the web accessible to all. "Accessibility" is the keyword here, if it takes a nil content element to suggest/enhance accessibility, that's a small penalty to pay. But usually it is fully possible to use the available "empty space" for a good cause, in which case this whole discussion becomes mute. -- Rex
Received on Sunday, 25 August 2002 07:54:11 UTC