|
|
Posted by Jukka K. Korpela on 08/15/07 06:59
Scripsit Bergamot:
> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>>
>> You may have better luck if you use:
>>
>> <h2><a name="Aptana">Aptana</a></h2>
>
> Why is that better than <h2 id="Aptana">?
>
> The only browser I know of that doesn't support using id as an anchor
> is Netscape 4.x. Or is there another similarly broken browser out
> there?
Perhaps there is. Other reasons that might make people use the old construct
include:
1) They have some utility that assumes such anchors. (I do. I'm ashamed but
I won't touch my Perl code - Perl is, after all, a write-only language -
just to fix that.) Generally not relevant at all, but if relevant, it can be
very relevant.
2) They use authoring software that creates such links. There's usually no
reason to hand-edit them. I suppose there is such software.
3) They want to use an anchor name that does not conform to ID syntax. Beats
me why, but such anchors _are_ used.
4) They intend to style the heading in a manner that requires its content to
be wrapped in an inline container (a fairly common trick). Rather than using
<span>, why not use <a>?
So no good reason really, as a rule.
--
Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|