Re: name="" deprecated in XHTML

On 1 Jul 2008, at 15:39, Sebastian Mendel wrote:
> David Dorward schrieb:
>> On 1 Jul 2008, at 14:20, Sebastian Mendel wrote:
>>> yes, you can do all the things you could do with name also with  
>>> class, but you could also do all the things you can do with class  
>>> with the id
>> No, you can't. @id does not let you mark an element as being part  
>> of a group.
> ... in real world, all you can do with classes in (X)HTML could also  
> be done with the id, of course in a more complex way ... but this is  
> not the point

I suppose you could build an id along the lines of class1-class2- 
class3-somethingUnique ... but that would make it *extremely* complex  
to do just about anything with it.

>>> Depending on which element the attribute is applied to.
> yes ... in RFC but not in real world

Trying to give the same name to multiple anchors in the same document  
will break things.

>>> it is common to change classes of an element on the fly or dynamic
>> So what?
> e.g. changing the style dynamically of an element is done by  
> changing the class

I know why it is done, the question was - what does that have to do  
with your argument?

>>> name shouldn't
>> Why not?
> Why?

You were the one who made the assertion, please justify it.

>>> classes are overlapping, names not
>> I have no idea what you mean by that.
> Elements with name "a" do not interfere with Elements named "b"
> Elements in class "a" can interfere with Elements in class "b"


By default (if we leave microformats aside for the time being), being  
a member of a class doesn't change an element in any way except to  
mark it as being a member of that class. This lack of change includes  
its interactions with and impact on other elements.

A style applied to an element might change the way other elements are  
rendered, but the only connection that has to the class is that a  
class selector might be used (and an attribute selector could be used  
to change it based on the name).

>>> it makes things more clear

>> How so?

> from real world understanding of the two terms class and name

My experience seems to be the reverse of yours. I'd say that name was  
more confusing than class.

David Dorward

Received on Tuesday, 1 July 2008 15:07:20 UTC