So, what's so bad with separators "simulated" with CSS. Con: you won't have them with CSS off. Pro: cleaner code, more flexibility. (http://rimantas.com/bits/hr/nohr.html was a quick example I made in May 2005, when similar discussion is going on some of w3 mailing list).
For me the con outweighs the pro; and your example actually demonstrates why I think HR is useful. Your example shows a page with clearly separate items of information - the design is giving unmissable cues that each paragraph is separated from the others. As such, your document's structure is reliant on the separator images to convey the correct meaning from the page. The integrity of the page's communication relies on the reader understanding that the three paragraphs are separated. Without CSS, you lose the separators. Your example embeds a key part of the communication in the CSS. The page should communicate the same thing with no CSS; and simply do it in a more "pretty" manner when CSS is applied. Separators do have semantic meaning, so when they occur we should use HR. It's just a pity the element is named according to how it is rendered, since that muddles things :) "separator" is a much better name for the element. For whatever another 2c is worth in this thread.... ;) cheers, Ben -- --- <http://weblog.200ok.com.au/> --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *******************************************************************
