On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 12:55:43 +0200, Lachlan Hunt
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Eugene T.S. Wong wrote:
<...>
Link to the nearest anchor in the relevant section of the page or, at
the very least, just to the page itself. It's not an ideal solution,
but there's not much else that can be done.
<...>
That looks like an attempt to redefine how fragment identifiers work for
HTML and XML documents, which is out of scope for this spec.
<...>
I'm confused. The subject of this thread you started is "Should ID be
required for <DFN>?", yet now when a suggestion requires the use of an
ID, you point out holes in it by trying to show that the required use of
an ID has problems.
The ID attribute should not be required for <dfn>.
One reasoning would be: dfn is a tag which has the semantical purpose to
"tell" the UA that the enclosed text defines *something*. Therefore, you
might not need to have a reference to this definition again. Forcing an ID
is ... useless in this case. If you want to reference the definition, then
use an ID (optionally).
--
http://www.robodesign.ro
ROBO Design - We bring you the future
