[WSG] A rave about 's

I've been thinking about a post from a few days ago that has been bothering me. The comments in this post highlight the difference between "valid markup" and "structurally-sound markup": Question: "...you have the headings of these as s I'm not sure if you should have more than one a page? is tha

Re: [WSG] A rave about 's

On Wednesday, March 17, 2004, at 03:35 PM, russ weakley wrote: While using multiple 's are valid, you should also think about the underlying page structure - and think about how other devices will interpret this structure. Russ Your point is well taken and needs to be implemented more. There i

Re: [WSG] A rave about 's

i would say that most design blogs are innocent in this respect. i know in mine, i use an H1 for my logo, and then H2 for all my subjects. btw, Doug Bowman officially deprecated the Farhner Image Replacement at SXSW monday because of the inconsitencies it has with various screen readers. Jerem

Re: [WSG] A rave about 's

At 07:35 18/03/2004 +1100, you wrote: I've been thinking about a post from a few days ago that has been bothering me. The comments in this post highlight the difference between "valid markup" and "structurally-sound markup": Question: "...you have the headings of these as s I'm not sure if you shou

Re: [WSG] A rave about 's

At 07:35 18/03/2004 +1100, you wrote: I've been thinking about a post from a few days ago that has been bothering me. The comments in this post highlight the difference between "valid markup" and "structurally-sound markup": Some more thoughts after a chat with a friend here: - Web pages can theor

Re: [WSG] A rave about 's

;russ weakley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Web Standards Group" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 6:35 AM Subject: [WSG] A rave about 's > I've been thinking about a post from a few days ago that has been bothering > me. The comments in t

Re: [WSG] A rave about 's

Sorry OT, but Jeremy is there anywhere I can find the keynotes to this statement. This is pretty big news, we all knew about the problems [http://www.alistapart.com/articles/fir/]but to officially deprecate! So which one [http://www.mezzoblue.com/archives/2003/12/12/accessible_i/index.php] do we

Re: [WSG] A rave about 's

On Thursday, March 18, 2004, at 09:44 AM, Jeremy Flint wrote: btw, Doug Bowman officially deprecated the Farhner Image Replacement at SXSW monday because of the inconsitencies it has with various screen readers. I'm a big fans of Doug, and have always avoided FIR, but the word "officially" her

Re: [WSG] A rave about 's

There are heaps of images-for-heading options described at this page that get around the problems associated with FIR: http://www.mezzoblue.com/tests/revised-image-replacement/ The FIR has been on the way out since Joe Clark wrote this: http://www.alistapart.com/articles/fir/ The big issue is dis

Re: [WSG] A rave about 's

I do believe that he said "officially", not really speaking for himself, but for the CSS community that supported that method as a whole. I will ask a few others that were sitting with my at the panel. You can get to his slides from a link on my site, as part of my write-up/review of that panel: ht

Re: [WSG] A rave about 's

I don't know how to answer that as many blogs are set up differently. The most interesting one, in terms of markup would have to be Tanteks blog - the entire page is set up using ordered lists: http://tantek.com/log/2004/03.html Another guy who talks about this (link stolen from dezwozhere.com): h

RE: [WSG] A rave about 's

> From: Jeremy Flint [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > I do believe that he said "officially", not really speaking > for himself, > but for the CSS community that supported that method as a > whole. Well...I'm part of the CSS community, and I was not consulted on this...so how presumptuous of him t

Re: [WSG] A rave about 's

Russ I already retracted the blog comment as ignorant stereotyping on my part. I have seen too many h1 used on blog though. Thanks for those links. They show that there is a valid alternative to this issue. Although I didn't find Tantek's site design very aesthetically pleasing, his all list

Re: [WSG] A rave about 's

Tantek's site is not really his own design. Every few weeks he changes the visual appearance to look like one of the top 100 blogs - to show how their sites could look the same but have sound underlying structure. Can't remember who's visual style he has used at present... Russ > Russ > > I alre

Re: [WSG] A rave about 's

Russ I had no idea. Thanks for letting me in on that. Leo On Thursday, March 18, 2004, at 04:11 PM, russ weakley wrote: Tantek's site is not really his own design. * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandar

Re: [WSG] A rave about 's

Right now he's working on Doc Searls' Weblog -- doc.weblogs.com. Tantek doesn't have a stylesheet switcher, but the older ones are listed as alternate stylesheets, so if you're using Firefox or something that lets you choose you can look at his previous recodes... Nate On Mar 18, 2004, at 3:1

Re: [WSG] A rave about 's

Gyrus wrote: - In a sense, a H1 in a web page signals the start of a new "document", or independent "section" of the page. Just for the record: So, is it legal to use more then one H1 on a page? If your answer is no, I wo

Re: [WSG] A rave about 's

On 19 Mar 2004, at 01:24, Jeremy Flint wrote: I do believe that he said "officially", not really speaking for himself, but for the CSS community that supported that method as a whole. It was just a turn of phrase - using the language of specs and such like (and yes he did say those exact words),

RE: [WSG] A rave about 's

Yes it's quite legal but it's semantically poor. This is what information architecture is all about. > h1 (logo, slogan, navigation, search etc.) > h1 > h1 > h1 > > That is the structure I would like to use. Any thoughts? Does the title of a book have the same semantic meaning as a chapter ti

Re: [WSG] A rave about 's

Hi My thinking is that hN delineates headings of the same semantic weight (or groups content), be they styled by CSS like or or not*: Solar System bodies Planets Mercury .. Venus .. Planetoids Pluto .. Sedna .. Quaor .. The difference being that h1 is the highest level of the headings in a

Re: [WSG] A rave about 's

Peter Firminger schrieb: Yes it's quite legal but it's semantically poor. This is what information architecture is all about. h1 (logo, slogan, navigation, search etc.) h1 h1 h1 That is the structure I would like to use. Any thoughts? Does the title of a book have the same semantic meaning a

Re: [WSG] A rave about 's

James Ellis schrieb: Hi My thinking is that hN delineates headings of the same semantic weight (or groups content), be they styled by CSS like or or not*: I agree. The difference being that h1 is the highest level of the headings in a document - there is nothing really that comes to mind that

Re: [WSG] A rave about 's

We could probably argue this back and forward, but I feel very strongly that there should be only one on a page and it should be the page title. I used to think it should be the site name but am moving away from that stance now. To use your example of 2 company founders - there would always need

Re: [WSG] A rave about 's

Tonico, At the risk of flogging a dead horse, I realised that I gave you only an opinion instead of a reason why there should be only one on a page. I think it is critical that even if there are two distinct topics on a page, there must be some overall summary of them, and this should be used on

Re: [WSG] A rave about 's

At 23:54 20/03/2004 +1100, you wrote: Company founders Joe Blog Blurb about Joe... Joe's career highs Career blurb... Jane doe Blurb about Jane... Jane's career highs Career blurb... site sections section 1 To jump back to another rela

Re: [WSG] A rave about 's

Thanks Russ, that was a very lucid explanation. The only question that is still open to me (and I think that is what Gyrus is pointing out), how should we mark up sections in a semantically rich and accesible way? Example: HeaderStuff (not directly related to the actual document) The a

Re: [WSG] A rave about 's

Tonico A website is not book. It is different, it is not something you hold in your hands, This very true and sometimes people with print experience still need to grasp it (sorry guys... you know who you are). However the reverse is also true. Programmers think in terms of modules (sections)