Hi Steve...
Well... this has been a really interesting excercise and you will all be
glad to know that I have decided that I will be going with the divs etc,
even though i still think there must be ( or should be) a better way.
Thanks for everyones input...
Jackie
Just a note for Steve... your suggestion that I was searching for some kind
of minimal markup without thinking about why I was doing it isn't actually
the case. I was thinking about it - and thats why I asked about <fieldset>.
Having, apparently erroneously, assumed that the W3Schools would know a bit
about what they were talking about, it appeared to me that by being able to
"thematically" group my little bits of information they would appear to be
just what they in fact are - a group of "thematically related bits of
information"! Nor did I simply want to stick a border around a block of
content.
But thats enough of that now.
Cheers
Jackie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Green" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 10:42 AM
Subject: RE: [WSG] Re: Use of Fieldsets other than in form?
Jackie, you said "I really didn't want a whole load of div classes with
headers & p tags etc churned out repeatedly down the page". Why not? It is
clearly the most appropriate way to mark up that content. And what would
the
use of fieldsets change? You would still have the same quantity of markup
except that it is less semantically accurate.
You are suggesting that you would leave out the header elements but who
would benefit from their omission or replacement with legends? It seems
that
you are searching for some kind of minimal markup without thinking about
why
you're doing it. How is a screen reader user going to understand the
content
of a page that just contains fieldsets and perhaps some paragraphs but no
headers or lists? How are they going to navigate effectively though it?
It's not just them either. Opera users who use keyboard navigation can
also
skip from header to header. And what about programmatic access by other
software applications? They will not understand your personal definition
of
the semantic structure so they will view the entire page as one lump
rather
than numerous groups of related content.
These are the kind of considerations that should drive your coding
decisions. Mark up your content in a manner that is unambiguous to other
users, and don't adopt a bizarre interpretation of the standards that no
one
other than a handful of 'imaginative' coders will understand.
Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jackie Reid
Sent: 05 June 2007 06:35
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [WSG] Re: Use of Fieldsets other than in form?
Hi all respondees
Ben Said
...it depends if you're talking about page layout or actual content -
ie. is your business name, logo etc being used in a header; or are you
creating a page which lists a bunch of businesses? For the former I'd
simply use a DIV, for the latter a list (maybe a definition list).
I am doing the latter.. (a page (or more) of business listings) so I was
wanted an easy way to tie all the relevent information into one nice
little
block.
As Lucien said the W3schools states that "The fieldset element draws a
box
around its containing elements." with no mention of form controls and
that's why I asked the question in the first place. It was a response to
an
"is there a better way to do this" sort of a moment! Also as Lucien said..
i
didnt just want to draw a box visually around a bit of content.. i wanted
to
be able to clearly "group" the related information together neatly.
I considered a DL but found it too restricting and I really didn't want a
whole load of div classes with headers & p tages etc churned out
repeatedly
down the page. It seemed to me that if the W3 schools definition of a
fieldset was correct and valid then it was ideal for my requirements. The
fact the validator passed it also seemed to me to say that it could be
used
in this way. If <fieldset> can't be used this way why does it pass
validation?
So... what to do? I dunno frankly... the jury is still out.
I will say this though ...i think its a shame that when someone takes the
time to respond to a question and states their point of view only to get
shot down in flames and virtually abused. This list is here to enable us
to
discuss the implementation of webstandards amongst like minded people and
I'm sure no one is really "hell-bent on abusing the standards".
Cheers
Jackie
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
__________ NOD32 2310 (20070605) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
