>>Let's discuss some issues for a moment and perhaps some light will shine
upon some comments.
Drew >> [qoute]The vague discussion of "some people" not approving of
skipped levels does not say that a hierarchy of headings is
required.[/quote]
>>The vague discussion of "some people" refers to the International
Standards
Organization. In their specifications they specifically state that headings
must follow a logical order and not skip any heading tags.
http://www.cs.tcd.ie/15445/15445.HTM<<
-----------------------------------------------------
So you are saying the specifications are incomplete? "Some people" does not
equate to "headers must be in hierarchical order". Readers of the
specifications cannot be reasonably expected to know there are other
documents which supersede the specs unless they are so informed. Where did I
miss that in the specs?
Either the specs are authoritative or they are not. If they are then what
they say is what needs to be followed. Other material is then by definition
extraneous. One can only go by what is written not what was "really" meant.
The logic of language suggests that since the term "some people" was used
and not a definitive statement that hierarchy order of headings need not be
respected. The paragraph is saying there is a school of thought which
endorses hierarchy but that the specs do not. Otherwise the language doesn't
mean what it says. And that would make the document worthless.
>>First, you can have pages without headings - that I'll agree with.
However,
once you start approaching any attempt to comply with WCAG you need to
follow the standards correctly.<<
Actually what she'd have to do is apply headers according to the specs and
then apply WCAG. Can't say if she'd done so since I haven't looked at the
site. Nor do I know exactly what WCAG standards you are saying she has to
apply. You or I might have organized the material differently but that is
immaterial to applying the standards properly.
As to a two word section, it is conceivable. It probably isn't going to be
great literature but there is no theoretical reason it can't be done. So
let's try an h1 of "fire" followed by the single word "hot". Not really
useful but proper.
drew
*****************************************************
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
*****************************************************
