Re: name="" deprecated in XHTML

Dustin Boyd schrieb:
>> like you would use id, name and class in real world
> Using that example, a class can contain more than one student, right?
> The same is true for the class attribute - it can contain more than
> one value. With a name, it is a unique identifier, much like id,
> except that on occasion you run into two people with the same name,
> not necessarily the same person. An id is a unique identifier that
> distinguishes between two things. If there are two people with the
> same name, they would have a different id.



or "A collection of sets definable by a shared property."

or "A set of objects possibly differing in state but not behavior."

> I'm saying that I can understand your point. However, class and id
> suit your needs. What is wrong with class="name", for example? After
> all, a person's name is just a part of that person. To describe a
> person, you might do something like this with the class and id
> attributes:
>     class="male" id="Sebastian_Mendel"
> There! You just identified your sex and your personal name. However,
> there is the case that your name is the same as another person's. For
> that reason, you might be assigned an ID number:
>     class="Sebastian_Mendel male" id="SMendel39384"
> Anyway, the idea of a name attribute seems to name the element, which
> already has a name. A 'p' element is called a "paragraph", for
> example. With the id attribute, it identifies the element. It is an
> alias for that specific element. For a class, it is one element of
> possibly many in the class.
> For what it is worth, the name attribute was retained on form
> elements, it seems. The only reason I can think of for it remaining is
> for backward compatibility. Nobody wants to redesign their forms, and
> there honestly isn't another way to group controls such as radio
> buttons together. However, other elements don't need it. After all, if
> you gave two links the same name, which link would<a
> href="#linkName">text</a>  point to - the first link or the second
> link? There are likely similar reasons, but that is one that creates a
> lot of ambiguity.
> If you can provide a possible use case where it would be beneficial
> that can't be done equally well by making use of class and id, I'm
> sure someone will give it some thought.

i didn't?

Sebastian Mendel

Received on Wednesday, 25 June 2008 16:19:35 UTC