From: Paul Noone
When using XHTML strict named anchors need to surround some link text, yes?
I'd tinkered with a[name]:hover but I'm loathe to create a style for this.
I
don't think hiding them is th eoption either.
Actually, when using XHTML Strict, name is not a valid attribute for
Martin J. Lambert wrote:
Actually, when using XHTML Strict, name is not a valid attribute for
anchors. You can use the id attribute to get the same jump-to-that-
section-of-the-page behaviour, but this will work with *any* element,
not just anchors. Since you don't want the appearance of a
From: Thierry Koblentz
Martin J. Lambert wrote:
Actually, when using XHTML Strict, name is not a valid attribute for
anchors. You can use the id attribute to get the same jump-to-that-
section-of-the-page behaviour, but this will work with *any* element,
not just anchors. Since you don't
Martin J. Lambert wrote:
From: Thierry Koblentz
I'm not sure about that, I think it is better to use both attributes
and may be even more to prevent a IE bug related to tabbing
navigation. http://www.motive.co.nz/glossary/anchor.php
Thierry Koblentz wrote:
name is used for old browsers. And I'm pretty sure it validates against a
Strict DTD (HTML or XHTML 1.0).
Please correct me if I'm wrong here...
No, you're indeed correct. Up to XHTML 1.0 Strict it's perfectly valid
to use the name attribute on anchors. It's only
Thanks guys. Patrick is right. I'd already validated the code and it came up
fine.
The reason I've run into this little problem is because, unlike HTML, XHTML
seems to require that the a tag surrounds some text. Perhaps an nbsp;
would do it?
The named anchor is picking up the color of the a:link
Paul Noone wrote:
The reason I've run into this little problem is because, unlike HTML,
XHTML seems to require that the a tag surrounds some text. Perhaps
an nbsp; would do it?
What make you think you can't leave them empty?
How are other people preventing this, apart from hiding their
@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: RE: [WSG] Unstyling named anchors
Thanks guys. Patrick is right. I'd already validated the code and it came up
fine.
The reason I've run into this little problem is because, unlike HTML, XHTML
seems to require that the a tag surrounds some text. Perhaps an nbsp;
would do it?
The named
Damien Hill wrote:
For IE and Firefox on PC, the styles I apply to a:link don't effect anchors.
Because a name=blah/a is not a :link, but a local anchor, whereas
a more generic a style selector will include those as well. So yes, a
simple way to avoid issues is to just define a:link,
into problems with that somewhere.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Damien Hill
Sent: Tuesday, 1 November 2005 9:36 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: RE: [WSG] Unstyling named anchors
For IE and Firefox on PC, the styles I apply
On 31/10/05, Patrick H. Lauke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thierry Koblentz wrote:
name is used for old browsers. And I'm pretty sure it validates against a
Strict DTD (HTML or XHTML 1.0).
Please correct me if I'm wrong here...
No, you're indeed correct. Up to XHTML 1.0 Strict it's perfectly
Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
Damien Hill wrote:
For IE and Firefox on PC, the styles I apply to a:link don't effect
anchors.
Because a name=blah/a is not a :link, but a local anchor,
whereas a more generic a style selector will include those as well.
So yes, a simple way to avoid issues is to
Gez Lemon wrote:
The name attribute is formerly deprecated for a, applet, form, frame,
iframe, img, and map in XHTML 1.0, and deleted from XHTML 1.1.
I stand (well, sit) corrected. I meant deleted, but said deprecated...d'oh!
P
--
Patrick H. Lauke
Paul Noone wrote:
Well now I'm totally confused. Ah...can anyone spell Dreamweaver? :\
a-HEM. Big sorry there.
What make you think you can't leave them empty?
Assumptions based on a code rewrite. Is that not the case? In which
case can it be self-containg and self-closing too?
a
Martin J. Lambert wrote:
Actually, when using XHTML Strict, name is not a valid attribute for
anchors. You can use the id attribute to get the same jump-to-that-
section-of-the-page behaviour, but this will work with *any* element,
not just anchors. Since you don't want the appearance of a
Gez Lemon wrote:
The name attribute is formerly deprecated for...form...in XHTML 1.0, and
deleted from XHTML 1.1.
From form, yes, but not from the various form elements such as
input /, where it may in fact be required for proper functioning,
though valid without. While I'm sure most of you
Paul Noone wrote:
I'd tinkered with a[name]:hover but I'm loathe to create a style for this. I
don't think hiding them is th eoption either.
Why not use a class (a name=... class=named/a) as a[name]
doesn't yet work on IE, never mind any browser which doesn't understand
jumping to an id.
How have you applied your link styles?
a { ... }
Or
a:link, a:visited { ... }
If you style links without specifying the :link pseudo-class, then you
select all anchors - whether or not the href attribute is present.
Hope that solves the problem.
Cheers,
Damien
-Original Message-
On 10/31/05, Paul Noone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does anyone have a standard approach to unstyling named anchors I this case
which will work cross-browser?
How about some Javascript? I don't really know what I'm doing with
that beast, but maybe something like document.getElementsByName(*);
and
19 matches
Mail list logo
