|
|
Posted by dorayme on 11/14/07 23:22
In article <slrnfjmql5.gpr.spamspam@bowser.marioworld>,
Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs> wrote:
> On 2007-11-14, Jukka K. Korpela <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> wrote:
> > Scripsit John L.:
> >
> >> richard wrote:
> >>
> >>> You show <div class="center"> as well as <div id="center">.
> >>> It is also not a good idea to use "tag words" as names. If you
> >>> insist, use something like "acenter" and "bcenter".
> >
> > That was clueless, not unexpectedly considering the posting history.
> >
> >> Using '.center' is fine because <center> is a deprecated
> >> presentational element and shouldn't be thought of as a tag at all.
> >
> > That wasn't much better. You give advice on HTML in public but cannot even
> > distinguish between elements and tags. Moreover, using "center" as a class
> > name is basically as presentational as <center> or <div align="center">.
> > Actually the so-called deprecated markup alternatives are better because
> > they are more honest: the say, in HTML, what presentational effect is
> > desired, whereas class="center" assigns just a class name, with no meaning
> > defined in HTML, and not suggestive of _semantics_ to a human reader.
>
> I'm all in favour of honesty, but <center> and align="center" are
> perhaps less likely to be supported in newer and/or future browsers
> (surely that's part of the sense of "deprecated"?)
Apart from the deprecation issue, however important:
If a list is wanted to be styled to centre in a container, and
<center> is used to do it, or it is styled in css to so center,
the normal sighted viewer of a web page is no wiser either way.
If a screen reader is involved, I am hazy on what happens in
respect to the difference?
If someone reads the actual html source, and does not read the
css, then it could be said that they are equally informed by the
use of <div class="center;"> as by
<center><div>...</div></center>. In other words, against all good
practice, it would clue up the reader with no need to see the
css.
If best practice was used and the class was based on need to so
style all such elements - e.g. class="outsideLinks" then the
human who did not look at the actual css would know at least and
at most that all such classes have some style or other. Still not
as singularly meaningful as <center>.
If a name, according to best practice, is given to an element
that does not conjure up the style but only the function of the
element itself and there are no other instances of this class -
the exercise being done purely formally to follow good practice -
then, once again, <center> and <div class="center"...>... would
have been more meaningful.
I think I will stop now, I am getting nowhere. But it was a break
from removing the millions of spots and things on the poster I am
restoring. <g>
--
dorayme
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|