On 21/2/06 12:31 PM, "Terrence Wood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> James Hunter: >> Is it appropriate to use the breadcrumb as the H1 element? > > Breadcrumbs do not describe the *document* structure - they hint at the > *site* structure (provided you only provide a hierarchal navigation > system) or site history (depending on what type of breadcrumb you > employ). > > I'm thinking out aloud here: not sure why, but using a list for > breadcrumbs doesn't quite sit right with me, despite it being a type of > navigation device. I think it is due to list structures replacing the > <dir> and <menu> elements - and the notion that the site hierarchy > represented as links is distinctly different from a navigation menu. > Anyone else have thoughts on this? Yes, I've argued strongly in the past that a list is not completely semantically-appropriate for breadcrumbs markup. Unlike breadcrumbs, a flat list does not represent a hierarchy, unless you nest them (and of course then it's no longer a flat list). So, breadcrumbs would need to be a series of nested lists, each with only one element, in order to satisfy me semantically. And of course, that is just absurd. Breadcrumbs are more about integrating a vertical site or navigation path, rather than a horizontal (in the conceptual sense) collection of same-level data. Of course I have to qualify this by saying that I treat breadcrumbs not as a dynamic path mirroring your journey through my website, but a clear and fixed path from site root to the page you're currently on. If you want to traverse back and forth along your own personal path, you can use the ... wait for it ... Back and Forwards buttons. -- Kevin Futter Webmaster, St. Bernard's College http://www.sbc.melb.catholic.edu.au/ ****************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ******************************************************
