Comments on: Guide to Semantic Use of HTML Elements http://www.joedolson.com/articles/2008/04/guide-to-semantic-html/ Tips and Commentary on Accessibility (and not always on topic.) Fri, 25 Jul 2008 06:14:33 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Joe Dolson http://www.joedolson.com/articles/2008/04/guide-to-semantic-html/#comment-23988 Joe Dolson Sat, 24 May 2008 13:59:02 +0000 http://www.joedolson.com/articles/?p=237#comment-23988 And people dealing with accessibility tend to use an even greater variety. SEO-focused developers tend to use elements which may be treated as having additional value by search engines; accessible web site developers are concentrating on adding anything which <em>might</em> be able to provide greater meaning or added value for the disabled. Similar, but different. And people dealing with accessibility tend to use an even greater variety. SEO-focused developers tend to use elements which may be treated as having additional value by search engines; accessible web site developers are concentrating on adding anything which might be able to provide greater meaning or added value for the disabled.

Similar, but different.

]]> By: Paris http://www.joedolson.com/articles/2008/04/guide-to-semantic-html/#comment-23987 Paris Sat, 24 May 2008 08:21:35 +0000 http://www.joedolson.com/articles/?p=237#comment-23987 its amazing how many people only use a mere 20% of all these tags. i mean many times its easier to format a div element than using an h1 element. People dealing with seo thought tend to use more and more a variety of tags since se translate them diferently its amazing how many people only use a mere 20% of all these tags. i mean many times its easier to format a div element than using an h1 element. People dealing with seo thought tend to use more and more a variety of tags since se translate them diferently

]]> By: Jason Marsh http://www.joedolson.com/articles/2008/04/guide-to-semantic-html/#comment-23981 Jason Marsh Wed, 21 May 2008 15:26:43 +0000 http://www.joedolson.com/articles/?p=237#comment-23981 Great reference, great article, thanks Great reference, great article, thanks

]]> By: Joe Dolson http://www.joedolson.com/articles/2008/04/guide-to-semantic-html/#comment-23943 Joe Dolson Sun, 13 Apr 2008 19:49:18 +0000 http://www.joedolson.com/articles/?p=237#comment-23943 Boy, I can't imagine what your favorite deprecated element might have been. Could it be <code>strike</code>? Thanks! ;) Boy, I can’t imagine what your favorite deprecated element might have been. Could it be strike?

Thanks! ;)

]]> By: Elizabeth Able http://www.joedolson.com/articles/2008/04/guide-to-semantic-html/#comment-23942 Elizabeth Able Sun, 13 Apr 2008 19:20:31 +0000 http://www.joedolson.com/articles/?p=237#comment-23942 Hi Joe. I <strike>remembered</strike> thought of <strike>my favorite cat lover and accessibility fan</strike> this post today when <strike>playing with</strike> using my favorite depreciated element. I'll let you guess which one it is... Thank you for continuing to blog about these terms. Semantics are an interesting subject matter, in that in isolation they can make for Very Dull reading, but they can also fire some Very Fascinating conceptual discussions that lead to a better web. More power to you. Hi Joe. I remembered thought of my favorite cat lover and accessibility fan this post today when playing with using my favorite depreciated element. I’ll let you guess which one it is…

Thank you for continuing to blog about these terms. Semantics are an interesting subject matter, in that in isolation they can make for Very Dull reading, but they can also fire some Very Fascinating conceptual discussions that lead to a better web. More power to you.

]]> By: Joe Dolson http://www.joedolson.com/articles/2008/04/guide-to-semantic-html/#comment-23937 Joe Dolson Fri, 11 Apr 2008 14:37:21 +0000 http://www.joedolson.com/articles/?p=237#comment-23937 That's probably the best, most concise definition of the <code>dfn</code> element that I've seen. What it is, really, is a definition of "defining instance" --- something which is notably lacking in the specifications. I can see your point on the headings. It could well be interpreted that way...I'll have to rephrase that. Anchors: yep, that's true as well. I had a reason for phrasing it in the manner, which I've forgotten now - but I should, nonetheless, have included some mention of page anchors. More revisions, ho! That’s probably the best, most concise definition of the dfn element that I’ve seen. What it is, really, is a definition of “defining instance” — - something which is notably lacking in the specifications.

I can see your point on the headings. It could well be interpreted that way…I’ll have to rephrase that.

Anchors: yep, that’s true as well. I had a reason for phrasing it in the manner, which I’ve forgotten now - but I should, nonetheless, have included some mention of page anchors. More revisions, ho!

]]> By: Stevie D http://www.joedolson.com/articles/2008/04/guide-to-semantic-html/#comment-23934 Stevie D Fri, 11 Apr 2008 12:08:58 +0000 http://www.joedolson.com/articles/?p=237#comment-23934 I think you're assuming too much understanding of "outline". <blockquote>h1 is the top level heading element, and can be followed only by h2</blockquote> <code>[h1]</code> can be followed by <code>[h2]</code>, or <code>[p]</code>, <code>[div]</code> or various other block-level elements. I know exactly what you mean, but I think the way you've written it, some people new to HTML might get the wrong idea. <blockquote>When accompanied by an href attribute, the anchor element indicates an external resource (a resource other than the current document) accessible via hyperlink</blockquote> Not true - a hyperlink <em>can</em> refer to a point within the current document. <blockquote>This is one of the more difficult to define elements — which is ironic, given that it’s intended to represent the “defining instance” of a term.</blockquote> It's dead easy really. Like this... "<code><p></code>The <code><dfn></code>dfn element <code></dfn></code> is used to mark a term that is defined in the following text." I do use the <code>dfn</code> element - I have no idea if it is actually picked up by AT or search engines, but I use it anyway! I agree that <code>strike</code> belongs in the same category as <code>b</code> and <code>i</code>, although it's less common. I would keep <code>u</code> as very definitely deprecated, because the use of underlining (however it is achieved) should be reserved for hyperlinks only. I think you’re assuming too much understanding of “outline”.

h1 is the top level heading element, and can be followed only by h2

[h1] can be followed by [h2], or [p], [div] or various other block-level elements. I know exactly what you mean, but I think the way you’ve written it, some people new to HTML might get the wrong idea.

When accompanied by an href attribute, the anchor element indicates an external resource (a resource other than the current document) accessible via hyperlink

Not true - a hyperlink can refer to a point within the current document.

This is one of the more difficult to define elements — which is ironic, given that it’s intended to represent the “defining instance” of a term.

It’s dead easy really. Like this…
“<p>The <dfn>dfn element </dfn> is used to mark a term that is defined in the following text.”
I do use the dfn element - I have no idea if it is actually picked up by AT or search engines, but I use it anyway!

I agree that strike belongs in the same category as b and i, although it’s less common. I would keep u as very definitely deprecated, because the use of underlining (however it is achieved) should be reserved for hyperlinks only.

]]> By: Joe Dolson http://www.joedolson.com/articles/2008/04/guide-to-semantic-html/#comment-23933 Joe Dolson Thu, 10 Apr 2008 20:39:54 +0000 http://www.joedolson.com/articles/?p=237#comment-23933 I agree --- in fact, I'd go even further to say that there's a fair amount of confusion in having any elements/attributes with the same names - <code>cite</code>, for example. It can make communication that much more difficult. I agree — - in fact, I’d go even further to say that there’s a fair amount of confusion in having any elements/attributes with the same names - cite, for example. It can make communication that much more difficult.

]]> By: Xslf http://www.joedolson.com/articles/2008/04/guide-to-semantic-html/#comment-23932 Xslf Thu, 10 Apr 2008 20:37:53 +0000 http://www.joedolson.com/articles/?p=237#comment-23932 Got it, thanks! It is confusing when there is a deprecated element and a very non-deprecated attribute with the same name... Got it, thanks!

It is confusing when there is a deprecated element and a very non-deprecated attribute with the same name…

]]> By: Joe Dolson http://www.joedolson.com/articles/2008/04/guide-to-semantic-html/#comment-23931 Joe Dolson Thu, 10 Apr 2008 14:41:27 +0000 http://www.joedolson.com/articles/?p=237#comment-23931 It's the "<a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/lists.html#edef-DIR">directory list</a>" element. As defined by the HTML 4.01 specification: <blockquote> The DIR element was designed to be used for creating multicolumn directory lists. The MENU element was designed to be used for single column menu lists. Both elements have the same structure as UL, just different rendering. In practice, a user agent will render a DIR or MENU list exactly as a UL list. We strongly recommend using UL instead of these elements. </blockquote> It's worth noting, of course, that this has <em>never</em> been an element in wide application. It’s the “directory list” element. As defined by the HTML 4.01 specification:

The DIR element was designed to be used for creating multicolumn directory lists. The MENU element was designed to be used for single column menu lists. Both elements have the same structure as UL, just different rendering. In practice, a user agent will render a DIR or MENU list exactly as a UL list.

We strongly recommend using UL instead of these elements.

It’s worth noting, of course, that this has never been an element in wide application.

]]>