Hi
D*** you guys are good. When I grow up, I'm 38, I want to be just like you ;) Thanks, I understand.
On Monday, November 29, 2004, at 01:15 PM, Lea de Groot wrote:
Peter Firminger wrote:<dd><em>date</em></dd>
Mordechai Peller said:Which is why I think that <dd class="date">date</dd> would be better.
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 11:49:53 -0800, Chris Kennon wrote:As I started this thread I'm unsure how or why this is necessary, would you elaborate?
Mordechai (if I can presume to speak for him!) is suggesting that putting an em tag entirely around a block level element (the dd) is not very semantic and a class on the containing dd is more so. I'm inclined to agree. While <div>lorem ipsum dolor <em>sit amet</em> consectetur</div> would appear to have meaning <div><em>lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur</em></div> would appear a little redundant. <div class="something">lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur</div> is better.
Lea
--
Lea de Groot
Elysian Systems - I Understand the Internet <http://elysiansystems.com/>
Search Engine Optimisation, Usability, Information Architecture, Web
Design
Brisbane, Australia
******************************************************
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ******************************************************
_______________________________
"Knowing is not enough, you must apply;
willing is not enough, you must do."
---Bruce Lee****************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ******************************************************
