On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 9:06 AM, Jens Brueckmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I said it may explain ALA's approach, but that doesn't mean I like the idea >> ;) >> fwiw, I never use more than one H1 per document since I'm using it for site >> title. imho, if H1 is used for site title it can't be used again in the >> page. > > I agree. Two level-1 headings seem somewhat confusing to me. >
Why is it confusing? Unusual perhaps. What's the basis in the specs for this kind of argument? The specs discuss sections not pages or documents -- just sections. If an author is comfortable defining a section as a page or a document, that's fine. But saying that once an h1 is used as a page title it can't be used again on the page, or that ALA has "the" right way simply can't be supported. These are simply alternate interpretations of the term section. Indeed again it is worth pointing out that in the specs h1 is wrapped in a div to help define the section not the other way around. Even the discussion of skipping numbered headers isn't definitive. The note says "some people" not "you must not". Granted that the some people is as I recall having this discussion a few years back, IEEE, it is still not normative.. Again, if you want to read the tea leaves, look at the html5 specs. There h1-h6 are clearly subordinate to sections and site headers. So within rather broad guidelines it is a matter of choice. When and if 5 is implemented the choices are more confined and proper semantic use of elements will go much further towards making it possible for UA's to more fruitfully interpret author intent which is the point of css and xhtml in enhancing usability and accessibility. drew ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *******************************************************************
