Sent by Jeroen Visser [ vizi ] on 22 July 2004 11:11
David Dorward wrote:
> On 22 Jul 2004, at 11:08, Jeroen Visser [ vizi ] wrote:
>
>>I use XHTML transitional or strict, depending on the site. Be aware
>>that name attributes are formally deprecated in XHTML1.0/strict and
>>XHTML1.1, while most browsers still rely on name/value pairs for forms
>>to work properly.
>
> Name attributes on form controls are NOT deprecated.
You're right, I mistakenly read the specs for XHTML1 as 'forms shouldn't
have name attributes' instead of 'only the form element itself shouldn't
have the name attribute'. [slaps his head]
> Name attributes on anchors are NOT deprecated (but are simply removed
> in XHTML 1.1 - they are still there in 1.0 Strict).
Here, I disagree. The specs are clear on this one:
"4.10 The elements with 'id' and 'name' attributes
HTML 4 defined the name attribute for the elements a, applet, form,
frame, iframe, img, and map. HTML 4 also introduced the id attribute.
Both of these attributes are designed to be used as fragment identifiers.
(...)
Note that in XHTML 1.0, the name attribute of these elements is formally
deprecated, and will be removed in a subsequent version of XHTML."
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-xhtml1-20000126/>
But thanks for correcting me. If you'll excuse me, I have a pile of
transitional dtd's to convert. %-)
Jeroen
--
vizi fotografie & grafisch ontwerp
I http://www.vizi.nl/
E [EMAIL-REMOVED]
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [EMAIL-REMOVED]]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
