On May 10, 2007, at 4:45 PM, James Craig wrote:
Ryan King wrote:
James Craig wrote:
Haven't thought too much about this, but are there any obvious
gotchas to using an anchor element with name attribute as a
potential replacement for the abbr-design-pattern?
I believe a[name] and @id need to be unique across an entire page.
This would make it impossible to have two events with the the same
dtstart, dtend or dtstamp on the same page. I think that makes it
unworkable.
Only ID has that restriction. Radio buttons, for example, require
elements have unique IDs but the same NAME.
a[name has restrictions that input[name] does not have.
Per [1], @id's and a[name] are collectively known as "anchor names"
and must be unique, as they share the same name space. A relevant
snippet:
The id and name attributes share the same name space. This means
that they cannot both define an anchor with the same name in the
same document. It is permissible to use both attributes to specify
an element's unique identifier for the following elements: A,
APPLET, FORM, FRAME, IFRAME, IMG, and MAP. When both attributes are
used on a single element, their values must be identical.
-ryan
1. http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/links.html#h-12.2.1
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
