On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 06:49:01PM +0200, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: > On Monday, 16 September 2013 at 16:44:56 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu > wrote: > >I don't find disagreement with what I said. > >[...] > >Nice, but what I see here is "different", not "better". > > I think we may be disagreeing regarding different things. > > >>You could use both (<dl class="d_decl">) if you like. > > > >I guess '<dl class="d_decl">' is one iota more specific than '<div > >class="d_decl">' and would help if one wanted to view the HTML > >without any accompanying CSS. I doubt this is a goal to pursue. > > I refer to my original argument about how this is > borderline-nitpicking. I'd like to add, however, that user-agents > such as screen readers might behave better when using appropriate > HTML tags.
I can attest to that. I'm on another mailing list where one of the list members is sight-impaired, and she complains about how some websites (i.e. those that suffer from heavy divitis and spanitis) simply can't be read in any sane way by the screen reader. Using built-in semantic tags like <dl> can make a world of difference for these users, since the screen reader has no idea what class="d_decl" means, but it *does* know what <dl> means. I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss it. T -- It is the quality rather than the quantity that matters. -- Lucius Annaeus Seneca