- From: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>
- Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 08:26:12 +0100
- To: w3-html <www-html@w3.org>
David Dorward wrote: > @name defines the name of an anchor for the purposes of fragment > identifiers, or the name of a control for the purposes of identifying it > when submitting to the server (and grouping radio buttons), or > identifies a frame / image map / image, etc. > > Most of those cases would, IMO, be better handled by @id, As understand it, that is exactly why @id was introduced in the first place. The only reason @name is still recognized on A elements is to support pages written for pre-HTML 4.0 browsers. The only thing I don't understand is why it's uses as an alternative to @id wasn't deprecated in HTML 4. -- David Woolley Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want. RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam, that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.
Received on Tuesday, 1 July 2008 07:24:48 UTC