[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
At 10:52 AM +0200 6/6/04, Henrik Martensson wrote:
>I wonder why, though. I can understand bending, or even breaking, rules when
>there is a distinct advantage to it. There does not seem to be in this
>case, because they could just as easily have done this:
>
><div class="quoteoftheday">
> ...
></div>
Whim, mostly. I suppose if I had written that part of the page on a
different day in a different mood I might have used the solution you
proposed, though that would have in no way made the page any more
useful to anyone in any way I can see. I could have used one of those
cool Valid XHTML logos to eat a little more bandwidth I suppose. :-)
I do think, though, that quoteoftheday is a more accurate description
of what's contained therein than a div element is. The class
attribute is a nasty, ugly hack, designed to get around the
inextensible nature of HTML. Inventing new markup to describe new
things has more of the XML nature than changing attribute values does.
For what it's worth, at one point I did experiment with extending the
XHTML DTD through its defined extension mechanisms to include my
quoteoftheday and today elements, so the page would be valid as well
as well-formed. Unfortunately, that severely confused pretty much all
browsers so I was not able to stick with that. Simple, invalid but
well-formed markup seems to work well though.
--
Elliotte Rusty Harold
elharo@metalab.unc.edu
Effective XML (Addison-Wesley, 2003)
http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/effectivexml
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0321150406/ref%3Dnosim/cafeaulaitA
|
