From the CSS Mastery Advanced Web Standards Solutions book by Andy Budd,
and I quote:
Many people mistakenly believe that a div element has no semantic meaning.
However div actually stands for *division *and provides a way of dividing a
document into meaningful areas. So by wrapping your main
Andy's technically correct, and it's true that pointing to the main content of
the document is good for accessibility, though not because of semantics so much
as that you can point to it in a Skip to main content link.
id='mainContent' doesn't communicate any semantics by itself. (That's
Ben Lau wrote:
But as far as i know, screen readers do not pick up IDs or classes?
So even by declaring a div ID=mainNav, it's still not enough to
describe what's inside the div?
I'm starting to get awfully confused...
A div is an element primarily intended for grouping blocks of content -
On 9/2/09 07:45, Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
How can CSS overflow replace div style=clear:both;/div?
See http://www.ejeliot.com/blog/59
--
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
***
List Guidelines:
On Mon, 9 Feb 2009, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote:
On 9/2/09 07:45, Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
How can CSS overflow replace div style=clear:both;/div?
See http://www.ejeliot.com/blog/59
Thanks, but I find the extra DIV no more objectionable than the
hackery and extra CSS described
...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org] On
Behalf Of Chris F.A. Johnson
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 8:45 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Implication of empty divs
On Mon, 9 Feb 2009, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote:
On 9/2/09 07:45, Chris F.A. Johnson
On 9/2/09 02:44, Gerard Hynes (Gmail) wrote:
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
pnbsp;/p due to the CMS they were using and JAWS would translate
this to/speak out blank which wasn't ideal. Am not
On a side note, there is a Firefox addon that reproduces JAWS-like
output (in text), called Fangs. Link:
http://www.standards-schmandards.com/projects/fangs/
- James
***
List Guidelines:
Wow... Learned a lot on this topic. Actually I'm using overflow:auto
but be careful, when zoom in the page sometimes that can break your
layout.
--
Regards,
Juarez P. A. Filho
Front-End Developer and Web Consultant
http://juarezpaf.com
The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of
Ben,
That's a great link. It also shows that an extra empty element, while
it may be the easy way out works across the board without side
effects of any kind.
Yes it is mixing content and presentation.
Joseph R. B. Taylor
Designer/Developer
---
Sites by Joe,
While the nbsp; does represent nothing in a way, it is something
and I would say that it's use would be slighty worse than a purely
empty element.
Joseph R. B. Taylor
Designer/Developer
---
Sites by Joe, LLC
Clean, Simple Elegant Web Design
Phone: (609) 335-3076
On Mon, 9 Feb 2009, Joseph Taylor wrote:
That's a great link. It also shows that an extra empty element, while it may
be the easy way out works across the board without side effects of any
kind.
Yes it is mixing content and presentation.
Many DIVs (and SPANs) are, in fact, used for
Ben Lau wrote:
Are there any (seriously) bad implications of having empty DIVs
around your HTML document?
I understand from that that you mean nested divs, for multiple
backgrounds etc.
A few extra divs means nothing other than extra weight, but I have
managed to break a few older browsers
On 8/2/09 23:33, Ben Lau wrote:
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
On Mon, 9 Feb 2009, Ben Lau wrote:
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.
I've never
On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 6:33 PM, Ben Lau bensan...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
Are there any (seriously) bad implications of having empty DIVs around your
HTML document?
No.
p.s. ignore all the long-winded answers.
--
--
Christian Montoya
mappdev.com :: christianmontoya.net
On Feb 8, 2009, at 9:00 PM, Christian Montoya wrote:
On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 6:33 PM, Ben Lau bensan...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
Are there any (seriously) bad implications of having empty DIVs
around your
HTML document?
No.
p.s. ignore all the long-winded answers.
Agreed.
Andrew
Agreed. An empty div is nothing. Same thing with an empty spans etc...
Joseph R. B. Taylor
/Designer / Developer/
--
Sites by Joe, LLC
/Clean, Simple and Elegant Web Design/
Phone: (609) 335-3076
Fax: (866) 301-8045
Web: http://sitesbyjoe.com
Email:
My advice below. Cheers, Gerard
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 9:33 AM, Ben Lau 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
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
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
I'm all for semantic mark up and removing redunant tags, but the
reality is supporting older browsers and browser quirks complicate
things. So, yes definitely prefer CSS overflow solution, to adding a
redundant/meaningless tag.
In the perfect world people would use the latest standards compliant
On Mon, 9 Feb 2009, Gerard Hynes (Gmail) wrote:
I'm all for semantic mark up and removing redunant tags, but the
reality is supporting older browsers and browser quirks complicate
things. So, yes definitely prefer CSS overflow solution, to adding a
redundant/meaningless tag.
How can CSS
23 matches
Mail list logo
