Empty link elements are not good (as Patrick pointed out)but what about named anchors (destination anchors)? Is there any reason why they should not be empty? I ask this because I am evaluating a site management application called Watchfire WebXM and it warns me of accessibility problems because I have <a id="toc" name="toc"></a> above the table of contents. It warns me that WCAG priority 2 guideline 13.1 states "Create link phrases that make sense when read out of context." My initial thoughts are that it's just a typical glitch of software unable to percieve the difference between a named anchor and a link. I think this because there are plenty of examples of accessibilitistas using them, for example: Mark Pilgrim's Dive Into Accessibility site (http://diveintoaccessibility.org/day_11_skipping_over_navigation_links.html) uses: <a name="startcontent" id="startcontent"></a>
Joe Clark's Building Accessible Websites (http://joeclark.org/book/sashay/serialization/Chapter08.html) has this: This construct is legal HTML: <a href="#zip_to_search" title="Zip to search"></a><a name="zip_to_search"></a> Can anyone clarify? thanks, Grant ********************************************************************** This message is intended for the addressee named and may contain privileged information or confidential information or both. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it and notify the sender. ********************************************************************** ****************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ******************************************************
