W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > August 2002

Re: target attribute of anchor tags

From: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 22:33:43 +0200
To: Bob Rosenberg <webmaster@rockmug.org>
cc: Daniel Terry <rrowv@usa.net>, www-validator@w3.org
Message-ID: <r01050300-1015-219C4D0AAB0E11D6AE3600039300CF5C@[]>

Bob Rosenberg <webmaster@rockmug.org> wrote:

>I agree that TARGET is needed for REFERENCE Tags (so long as you are not
>a W3C "Frames are bad and should be depreciated and you should not be
>allowed to open new windows" ivory tower non-designer type).

If this isn't the list for discussing the pros and cons of the target
attribute, it certainly is not the list for insulting those with carefully
considered _technical_ reservations about the use of frames and target
attributes with the value "_new"!

Please take that particular discussion elsewhere.

Given your apparent opinion on the issue, might I suggest you carefully
consider -- in best Advocatus Diaboli style -- what arguments might
persuade /you/ that frames/target are best avoided and let
public-evangelist@w3.org know. A dissenting point of view would be very
valuable in finding the best way to communicate best practices to the
general public.

I have lobbied for the update and improvement of SGML. I've done it for years.
I consider it the jewel for which XML is a setting.  It does deserve a bit or
polishing now and then.                                        -- Len Bullard
Received on Thursday, 8 August 2002 16:34:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:58:29 UTC