Haha, thanks. But I also do appreciate the long answers though; thanks Benjamin.
I've read on numerous blogs/tutorials/comments that having blank div is poor practice, and that it's also poor semantic markup because it's meaningless. I mention the javascript alternative because i'll be using these empty divs purely for decorative purposes, so if non-javascript can't see the yellow block that goes 9999em to the left of my website, I'm not that concerned. I'm just worried about screen readers picking up that empty div. So then you guys have no problem in using it for clearing as opposed to overflow:hidden/auto? On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 1:50 PM, Anthony Ziebell <anth...@fatpublisher.com.au > wrote: > If you use a tool such as tidy html in xhtml mode it will delete your > empty tags... probably a setting to turn that feature off, but something to > think about... > > Cheers, > Anthony. > > Gerard Hynes (Gmail) wrote: > > My advice below. Cheers, Gerard > > On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 9:33 AM, Ben Lau <bensan...@gmail.com> > <bensan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > Are there any (seriously) bad implications of having empty DIVs around your > HTML document? I try to avoid using them personally, but there are cases > where the visual design has forced me to add empty divs (or spans) just to > achieve the look. > Apart from adding extra weight and cluttering the document, I understand > screen readers do not pick up divs and spans? > > > I'm not expert about screen readers, but I did run a site I upgraded > through JAWS with some interesting results. The site had alot of > <p> </p> due to the CMS they were using and JAWS would translate > this to/speak out "blank" which wasn't ideal. Am not sure if it would > do the same for <p></p> or <div></div> or <div />. > > > > Would I be better off to insert these meaningless decorative tags using > javascript and modifying the DOM, while non-javascript users would see a > more cut down version of the design? Do screen readers pick up javascript > and events? > > > Javascript solution could work, but I would run your page through a > screen reader first and see if you're happy with the result. You can > download demo of JAWS > fromhttp://www.freedomscientific.com/products/fs/jaws-product-page.asp > > You'll probably identify other areas of content that could be improved > for screen readers. He's a good article about the > topichttp://www.webaim.org/techniques/screenreader/ > > Cheers, > ben > > ******************************************************************* > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm > Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org > ******************************************************************* > > > ******************************************************************* > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm > Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org > ******************************************************************* > > > > > > ******************************************************************* > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm > Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org > ******************************************************************* > ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *******************************************************************
