What about:
<head>
<style>
div { background-color:#FFFFCC}
h3, p { padding:0; margin:0}
div, a {width: 300px;}
a { display:block; padding: 10px}
</style>
</head>
<body>
<div>
<h3><a href="">Head</a></h3>
<p><a href="">Paragraph</a></p>
</div>
</body>
?
2009/11/6 <martin.hei...@devk.de>
> Hi!
>
> on Thursday, November 5, 2009 at 18:34 wsg@webstandardsgroup.org wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 4 Nov 2009, David Dorward wrote:
>
> >>
> >> On 4 Nov 2009, at 15:18, Stuart Foulstone wrote:
> >>
> >> > Since links are inline elements, they shouldn't contain block
> elements,
> >> > such as <div> and <p>.
> >> >
> >> > Why not use <span> (native) inline elements?
> >>
> >>
> >> Because it screws up the semantics.
> >
> > SPAN, like DIV, has no semantic meaning; how can it screw it up?
>
> Well if one changes from
>
> <a>
> <div>
> <h3></h3>
> <p></p>
> </div>
> </a>
>
> to
>
> <a>
> <span>
> <h3></h3>
> <p></p>
> </span>
> </a>
>
> the problem remains. It is just shifted from the div to the h3 and p
> tags. So you would have to change these tags to spans too and that
> would screw up the semantics.
>
> I would do it like this:
>
> <div>
> <a></a>
> <h3><a></a></h3>
> <p><a></a></p>
> </div>
>
> and make the first empty a display block and span the entire div. The
> other two a-Tags are fallbacks if css is turned off.
>
> It is more markup, but it validates. and the semantics are kept.
>
> regards
>
> Martin
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *******************************************************************
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
> *******************************************************************
>
>
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
*******************************************************************
