On some web sites I see that <p> is not used.

R

rf

Murray said:
Can't we all just, <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0
Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">, and
be friends?

There is no point (and no advantage) in using an XHTML doctype at large on
the web, unless there is a very specific reason for doing so.

The most used browser out there not only does not support XTML, it simply
does not know what it is. Serve up XHTML correctly and IE will politely ask
you if you want to download the file. Serve it up as text/html (as
everybody *must*) and IE tag-soup corrects it to HTML.

Why not simply give everybody HTML 4.01.
 
D

dorayme

"rf said:
(e-mail address removed) wrote:

something ... but dorayme stuck his big fat nose in and said a little
sarcastically:
Let's look at the particular context the OP had. Stuff like:

<h2>What products/services are suited for e-commerce?</h2>

Certain products/services appear more suitable...
<br/>
<br/>
The ideal products/services...
<br/>
<br/>
Products unsuitable for e-commerce...

<h2>How can I benefit from e-commerce?</h2>

The context I referred to and I quoted (using some ellipsis to cut down
the number of words in the text out of respect for the five readers in
the world who still bother to read a single thing I say and out of a
modest but albeit desperate desire to keep them falling below the number
of fingers on one earthling hand) was, in full:

<h1>Website Design</h1>
<strong>Website design</strong> is the part of building a website which
can include design of web pages using colour, graphics, animation,
photographs and fonts.
<h2>How can I benefit from website design?</h2>
A truly well designed website can turn into a strong marketing tool, the
primary objective of which is to accentuate your company's identity,
thus enabling you to differentiate from your competition and making
your business succeed in a highly competitive environment. People, who
browse the web, look at hundreds of websites and only an eye-catching
look can make them want to stay on your website for a few more seconds.
After that only an easy navigation and well-organized content can
encourage them to stay longer and to come back again and again.
<h2>Services we offer:</h2>

And I asked Murray, in relation to *this*, a specific thing about pauses
and the need for paragraph elements.
These things are *clearly* paragraphs yet the author did not mark them up as
paragraphs but used <br><br> under the mistaken assumption that ...

I am not disputing what you are saying, just pointing out that you are
referring to another bit altogether that is another issue. I am not
saying you should not discuss your thing. I am just pointing out that it
is not obvious to me that you always have to wrap a paragraph in a
paragraph element in all contexts and that sometimes, to do so, is to
make the world a worse place, not a better one.
 
D

dorayme

Murray said:
Can't we all just, <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0
Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">, and
be friends?

No Murray, you don't understand, no, no. It would ruin this newsgroup!
It would wreck the whole point of it in one single blow. This ng is a
laboratory experiment by God to work out what might be the best of all
possible worlds. If we adopted your suggestion, He would know it was a
worthless and impractical experiment because, in short, this doctype in
a world that actually contains Internet Explorer would be less than
ideal.
 
R

rf

dorayme said:

And I asked Murray, in relation to *this*, a specific thing about
pauses and the need for paragraph elements.

And I asked about another part of the same site, to indicate the author does
not know what he is talking about.
I am not disputing what you are saying, just pointing out that you are
referring to another bit altogether that is another issue. I am not
saying you should not discuss your thing. I am just pointing out that
it is not obvious to me that you always have to wrap a paragraph in a
paragraph element in all contexts and that sometimes, to do so, is to
make the world a worse place, not a better one.

Whatever you like to do you can. I for one though always embed a "paragraph"
inside a paragraph element.

Take that bit you quoted. Without those outer divs (which are *only* there
for presentational purposes) the document (the bit you quoted) will not
validate. A text element (nodeType == 3) cannot be a direct child of the
body element, and a few other elements as well for that matter. Hiding this
error inside a div is just like using javascript to open a new window
instead of using the target attribute so your HTML validates to strict. It
validates but is it *correct*.
 
D

dorayme

"rf said:
And I asked about another part of the same site, to indicate the author does
not know what he is talking about.

As I said, not disputing what you said in relation to your bit.
Whatever you like to do you can. I for one though always embed a "paragraph"
inside a paragraph element.

I am thinking not to continue doing this (as I tend to do) in all
circumstances.
Take that bit you quoted. Without those outer divs (which are *only* there
for presentational purposes) the document (the bit you quoted) will not
validate.

But a container div was there as I pointed out in my post. I was not
discussing the function of this, I did not look into that matter. In a
situation where this div *did* real and unexceptional work, there would
still be the actual issue I discussed and so the text without a
paragraph element would be valid in a decent Strict.
A text element (nodeType == 3) cannot be a direct child of the
body element, and a few other elements as well for that matter. Hiding this
error inside a div is just like using javascript to open a new window
instead of using the target attribute so your HTML validates to strict. It
validates but is it *correct*.

In other words, to continue my theme here, the motivation for one lump,
one paragraph lump of *loose text* inside a div does not entail that
that div is there for the validating motivation you mention.

In the situation I mention, it is arguably slightly worse to put the
text into a paragraph element. But I do not condemn anyone for doing so.
I accept goody goody acts much more these days whether or not they do
any good.
 
M

Murray

No Murray, you don't understand, no, no. It would ruin this newsgroup!
It would wreck the whole point of it in one single blow. This ng is a
laboratory experiment by God to work out what might be the best of all
possible worlds. If we adopted your suggestion, He would know it was a
worthless and impractical experiment because, in short, this doctype in
a world that actually contains Internet Explorer would be less than
ideal.

You know... If Internet Explorer actually worked properly life would
be pretty boring.
 
M

Murray

is just like using javascript to open a new window
instead of using the target attribute so your HTML validates to strict. It
validates but is it *correct*.

I think it is correct to use javascript to open a new window.
Manipulating an application to open a new window isn't the job of
html. Adding the target attribute to a link doesn't add any real
context to the link. You could use rel="external", then use javascipt
to open those in a new window...
 
M

Murray

Yeah, but there days when I'd trade an appendage (buyer's choice) for that
kind of boring.

sherm--

It keeps me employed... Fixing bugs. I think of IE6 as Sloth from The
Goonies. You can't really be angry at Sloth.
 
C

Chris F.A. Johnson

I think it is correct to use javascript to open a new window.
Manipulating an application to open a new window isn't the job of
html. Adding the target attribute to a link doesn't add any real
context to the link. You could use rel="external", then use javascipt
to open those in a new window...

That's a good way to get people to turn off JavaScript!
 
M

Murray

    That's a good way to get people to turn off JavaScript!

I prefer to not use either method, javascript or target, middle opens
a new browser if I want it to.
 
C

Chris F.A. Johnson

I prefer to not use either method, javascript or target, middle opens
a new browser if I want it to.

You can't put a middle button on a web page.

If JavaScript popups become common, I *will* turn off JavaScript
for most of my browsing.
 
R

rf

Chris said:
You can't put a middle button on a web page.

If JavaScript popups become common, I *will* turn off JavaScript
for most of my browsing.

You don't need to. Most modern browsers have options to prevent this sort of
stuff.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
474,085
Messages
2,570,597
Members
47,218
Latest member
GracieDebo

Latest Threads

Top