> Unfortunately I had not the correct arguments why this is not the > right way to do it. On this list, there are many discussions about how > to build the page semantically correct. Is there any info useful > information for starters about this subject available?
I don�t know about resources, but many people on the list would be able to answer this. This is a classic case of designing a layout for one set of browsers - those that support css - at the expense of a wide range of other devices - and therefore alienating specific user groups. This is the antithesis of what web standards, and in fact the web, is all about. "The power of the web is in its universality. Access by everyone regardless of disability is an essential aspect." Tim Berners-Lee, Founder of the World Wide Web, Director of W3C The question I'd be asking this person is: 1. have you looked at this sort of layout in a modern browser with css switched off - the content will suddenly have no meaning - it will all blend into one lump - with no block elements to divide it up and give meaning. 2. have you looked at this sort of layout in a text browser, where semantic meaning is essential. Headings and content are all displayed at equal weight, but indented according to headings and paragraph etc. for users of text-browsers, the layout will be meaningless. 3. have you listened to the layout on a screen reader. Screen reader users often use headings to navigate the page. What happens when they come to a page and there are no headings at all? 4. even if they do not care about these smaller user groups, the biggest question would be: Do you care about Google? How is Google going to index this content? The standard line of Google is the biggest blind user is particularly relevant here. Russ ****************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ******************************************************
