Martin Heiden wrote:
> I prefer the DIV because it shows beginning and end of the structural
> group. HR doesn't do that, it just marks the end.
This is because you've somehow been convinced that the HR is a crap
version of the end of a DIV. It isn't. It is not an end, it does not
imply the beginning of any structural group. It means something else.
Again, it's like saying crisps are better than chocolate because they
taste of potatoes. People who want chocolate are hardly going to be
dissuaded.
liorean wrote:
How is an element any more accessible (theoretically of course,
considering how bad the support situation for generated content and
styling of pseudo elements is) than a pseudo element? If you want your
separator, you can have it in the form of an ::after or ::before
styling. And the separator doesn't have the ability to describe the
groupings in any way.
Much as I'm loving my CSS3 experiments, pseudo-elements leave a weird
taste in my mouth when it comes to accessibility. You must admit, very
few browsers will generate your pseudo-elements - and that /is/ an
accessibility issue.
My qualm lies with the notion that, from its inception, CSS was meant to
divide presentation from content. Now CSS has the 'content' property.
When I have used :after{content:whatever}, it's usually to include extra
info after links, making hidden aspects of the markup available (ie
title and href attributes), etc.
This is markedly different. At this rate we'll end up with
<div class="notASeparatorISwear"></div>
.notASeparatorISwear{content:hahaYesItIs.gif}
Regards,
Barney
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
