- From: (wrong string) äper <christoph.paeper@tu-clausthal.de>
- Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 02:17:29 +0100
- To: "W3 HTML Mailing List" <www-html@w3.org>
kelvSYC:
> On 1/21/03 6:33 AM, "Christoph P*per" <christoph.paeper@tu-clausthal.de>
>
>> Those, and <section/>, would resemble <hr/> as much as <l/> does resemble
>> <br/>.
>
> I don't get that part: why would an empty <section> resemble more of <hr>
> than <br>?
If there's any mark-up in <hr/>, it's IMHO meant to be a section divider
which I'd express with an empty <section/>. The relation between <br/> and
<l/> is similar.
> I was hoping <param> could go under any element as its first children,
> seeing that <object> is pretty much universal now...
What about nested objects?
>> <body id="one"><p id="start"> </p></body>
>> <body id="two"><p id="start"> </p></body>
>
>> body#one p#start {color: green}
>> body#two p#start {color: red}
>
> But that makes it so that your ID scope is now site-wide instead of
> page-wide.
I don't know exactly what you mean. You can have the same ids in different
documents and still style them differently. I don't say this was a good
solution.
>>> (my personal bugbear here is <cite cite="">)
>>
>> <cite href=""> should be enough, yes.
>
> Wouldn't that put a link inside <cite>, or is that the point?
That's pretty much what the cite attribute does, if I'm not getting it
wrong.
Christoph Päper
Received on Tuesday, 21 January 2003 20:17:29 UTC