http://simplebits.com/notebook/2004/08/04/sq-4/ Handcrafted pixels & text from Salem, Massachusetts. Tue, 08 Dec 2009 23:15:49 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 http://simplebits.com/notebook/2004/08/04/sq-4/#comment-4349 Lachlan Hunt Fri, 06 Aug 2004 05:34:32 +0000 http://www.simplebits.com/wp/notebook/2004/08/04/sq-4/#comment-4349 > Using A is for me no good. The BR > tag tag is a visual tag. Using EM, > STRONG, B or I is just as bad, > because again they are added to > create visuals. While <code><br></code> may have many presentational abuses, it is actually semantic, though not structured as nicely as <code><l></code> in XHTML 2. Most of the time it's presentational when two are used successively, instead of a new paragraph or possibly using <code><pre></code> without using any <code><br/></code> elements (<strong>if appropriate</strong> for the semantics of the content). When it's used as in example A, it's a semantic use, not just a presentational one. <code><strong></code> and <code><em></code> are not presentational either, as you said they are, however, now that people are finally learning that <code><b></code> and <code><i></code> are presentational, I'm starting to see people who use them for their presentational effects, rather than their semantics. eg. I see a lot of: <code><td><strong>heading</strong></td></code> instead of: <code><th>heading</th></code> > Using A is for me no good. The BR
> tag tag is a visual tag. Using EM,
> STRONG, B or I is just as bad,
> because again they are added to
> create visuals.
While <br> may have many presentational abuses, it is actually semantic, though not structured as nicely as <l> in XHTML 2.
Most of the time it’s presentational when two are used successively, instead of a new paragraph or possibly using <pre> without using any <br/> elements (if appropriate for the semantics of the content).
When it’s used as in example A, it’s a semantic use, not just a presentational one.
<strong> and <em> are not presentational either, as you said they are, however, now that people are finally learning that <b> and <i> are presentational, I’m starting to see people who use them for their presentational effects, rather than their semantics.
eg. I see a lot of:
<td><strong>heading</strong></td>
instead of:
<th>heading</th>

]]> http://simplebits.com/notebook/2004/08/04/sq-4/#comment-4348 Eli Fri, 06 Aug 2004 02:01:44 +0000 http://www.simplebits.com/wp/notebook/2004/08/04/sq-4/#comment-4348 I say "D". I use something like this: <address> <div>ABC Widgets, Inc.</div> <div>100 - 1234 West Main Street</div> <div>Anytown, State, ZIP</div> <div>Ph: 555-555-1234</div> <div>Fax: 555-555-1234</div> </address> <code>div</code>s divide up the address into component parts. If I need to style individual parts of the address I'll add <code>id</code> hooks on the individual <code>div</code>s I say “D”. I use something like this:
<address>
<div>ABC Widgets, Inc.</div>
<div>100 – 1234 West Main Street</div>
<div>Anytown, State, ZIP</div>
<div>Ph: 555-555-1234</div>
<div>Fax: 555-555-1234</div>
</address>
divs divide up the address into component parts. If I need to style individual parts of the address I’ll add id hooks on the individual divs

]]> http://simplebits.com/notebook/2004/08/04/sq-4/#comment-4347 Thomas Hammer Fri, 06 Aug 2004 01:39:32 +0000 http://www.simplebits.com/wp/notebook/2004/08/04/sq-4/#comment-4347 I love the web standards community. <strong>You guys are doing my job here!</strong> Presenting names, adresses and phone numbers on a web site is the most important part of my job descriptional — I work as a web designer for a Norwegian phone book/information service. So far we've been using <code>table</code>s in our phone book on the web, but that might change. Lots of good suggestions here. Since everything has been said (or so it seems) I'll share a few thoughts I've been puzzling with in job situations. <strong>When I first saw the quiz, I initially came up with the same as Jacob Patton suggests in comment #2</strong>. I've been thinking about using <code>dl</code>s earlier, and appretiate this being discussed. The big difference: A phone book has more than one name and address. <strong>In my company's phone book on the web, presentation is as an important issue as markup.</strong> We have to be pragmatic in the real world (hence the use of <code>table</code>s so far.) What would be great is a solution where the CSS determines how everything is listed. The folks who use our service might differ in their preferences. Some want it all on one line with a new name for each line (something a <code>table</code> handles very well), some like to see the address below the name and the phone number aligned to the right side of each name and address (that's how we do it today). <strong>Any suggestions on how to accomplish these two variations without altering the html docs</strong>? Maybe a bit on the side, but still on topic (or maybe a topic for another <em>SimpleQuiz</em>?) I also have a question conserning the <code>address</code>-tag (I haven't used the tag since... it must be 1996.) The specs say it's supposed to be used for the page owner's address. Would it be wrong to use it on every address in a phone book? I love the web standards community. You guys are doing my job here!
Presenting names, adresses and phone numbers on a web site is the most important part of my job descriptional — I work as a web designer for a Norwegian phone book/information service.
So far we’ve been using tables in our phone book on the web, but that might change.
Lots of good suggestions here. Since everything has been said (or so it seems) I’ll share a few thoughts I’ve been puzzling with in job situations.
When I first saw the quiz, I initially came up with the same as Jacob Patton suggests in comment #2. I’ve been thinking about using dls earlier, and appretiate this being discussed.
The big difference: A phone book has more than one name and address. In my company’s phone book on the web, presentation is as an important issue as markup. We have to be pragmatic in the real world (hence the use of tables so far.) What would be great is a solution where the CSS determines how everything is listed.
The folks who use our service might differ in their preferences. Some want it all on one line with a new name for each line (something a table handles very well), some like to see the address below the name and the phone number aligned to the right side of each name and address (that’s how we do it today). Any suggestions on how to accomplish these two variations without altering the html docs? Maybe a bit on the side, but still on topic (or maybe a topic for another SimpleQuiz?)
I also have a question conserning the address-tag (I haven’t used the tag since… it must be 1996.) The specs say it’s supposed to be used for the page owner’s address. Would it be wrong to use it on every address in a phone book?

]]> http://simplebits.com/notebook/2004/08/04/sq-4/#comment-4346 Alexander Savenkov Fri, 06 Aug 2004 00:41:15 +0000 http://www.simplebits.com/wp/notebook/2004/08/04/sq-4/#comment-4346 I’m somewhat suprised with the amount of the comments on such a simple question. I wasn’t going to add more but I guess some people just misunderstand the concept of the SimpleQuiz. We’re not talking about how certain data should be marked up in <em>your</em> database. Imagine you have some initial source, say, XML. We’re talking about how to represent it on the <em>World Wide Web with XHTML</em> (not with <em>your</em> proprietary format). Dan, this could be made more clear. I’m somewhat suprised with the amount of the comments on such a simple question.
I wasn’t going to add more but I guess some people just misunderstand the concept of the SimpleQuiz.
We’re not talking about how certain data should be marked up in your database. Imagine you have some initial source, say, XML. We’re talking about how to represent it on the World Wide Web with XHTML (not with your proprietary format).
Dan, this could be made more clear.

]]> http://simplebits.com/notebook/2004/08/04/sq-4/#comment-4345 Jesse Pearlman Karlsberg Thu, 05 Aug 2004 23:45:56 +0000 http://www.simplebits.com/wp/notebook/2004/08/04/sq-4/#comment-4345 Wow, that's a lot of comments. I initially thought that A made sense. The controversy about the intention of the spec is interesting, but thinking through cases where I would include an address of sorts on a page, the requirement from the spec that the <code>address</code> tag contain "contact information for a document or a major part of a document" strikes me as a pretty loose requirement: 1. A contact information page for a department of a company or institution could use the <code>address</code> tag. 2. A reference in a page to an individual followed by their address could also appropriately use the <code>address</code> tag, as that address would amount to contact info. for a major "part of a document." 3. Even a list of resources with relevant contact information could make proper use of <code>address</code> because each resource entry constitutes an important "part of a document" for which the <code>address</code> counts as contact information. So I'm willing to accept that the <code>address</code> tag is appropriate for addresses in nearly all common cases. In uncommon cases, the tag would not be semantically appropriate, more on that later. <a href="http://www.simplebits.com/notebook/2004/08/04/sq.html#comment83" rel="nofollow">David's</a> recognition that "The [address] tag defines the start of an address. You should use it to define addresses, signatures, or authorships of documents." made me think that there might be better options than A, options like the solutions offered by <a href="http://www.simplebits.com/notebook/2004/08/04/sq.html#comment102" rel="nofollow">Jason</a> and <a href="http://www.simplebits.com/notebook/2004/08/04/sq.html#comment104" rel="nofollow">Michael Smith</a> where the <code>address</code> tag is used to mark-up each different type of address separately. Michael's solution, where each address tag contains a full address seems like the best option. Optionally, <code><br /></code>s could be added to allow for line breaks and <code><span></code>s could be inserted to allow for independent styling of different elements, (but <code>display: block</code> applied to <code>span</code> seems to me to violate the rule that <code>address</code> can't contain block level elements. For any addresses that somehow fall outside of what the spec might allow, replace the <code>address</code> tags with <code><p class="address"></code>. This solution is semantic (unlike B or C), it degrades well (unlike A, all <em>essential</em> line breaks display in no-CSS browsers), and it's less complicated than C. So, my vote is for D. Wow, that’s a lot of comments. I initially thought that A made sense. The controversy about the intention of the spec is interesting, but thinking through cases where I would include an address of sorts on a page, the requirement from the spec that the address tag contain “contact information for a document or a major part of a document” strikes me as a pretty loose requirement:
1. A contact information page for a department of a company or institution could use the address tag.
2. A reference in a page to an individual followed by their address could also appropriately use the address tag, as that address would amount to contact info. for a major “part of a document.”
3. Even a list of resources with relevant contact information could make proper use of address because each resource entry constitutes an important “part of a document” for which the address counts as contact information.
So I’m willing to accept that the address tag is appropriate for addresses in nearly all common cases. In uncommon cases, the tag would not be semantically appropriate, more on that later.
David’s recognition that “The [address] tag defines the start of an address. You should use it to define addresses, signatures, or authorships of documents.” made me think that there might be better options than A, options like the solutions offered by Jason and Michael Smith where the address tag is used to mark-up each different type of address separately.
Michael’s solution, where each address tag contains a full address seems like the best option. Optionally, <br />s could be added to allow for line breaks and <span>s could be inserted to allow for independent styling of different elements, (but display: block applied to span seems to me to violate the rule that address can’t contain block level elements.
For any addresses that somehow fall outside of what the spec might allow, replace the address tags with <p class="address">.
This solution is semantic (unlike B or C), it degrades well (unlike A, all essential line breaks display in no-CSS browsers), and it’s less complicated than C. So, my vote is for D.

]]> http://simplebits.com/notebook/2004/08/04/sq-4/#comment-4344 Jim Dabell Thu, 05 Aug 2004 23:38:43 +0000 http://www.simplebits.com/wp/notebook/2004/08/04/sq-4/#comment-4344 "But commas aren’t part of the address. Adding extra characters is just as bad as adding extra tags." I always put commas at the end of each line when writing, typing, or marking up addresses. It's normal to do so as far as I am concerned. “But commas aren’t part of the address. Adding extra characters is just as bad as adding extra tags.”
I always put commas at the end of each line when writing, typing, or marking up addresses. It’s normal to do so as far as I am concerned.

]]> http://simplebits.com/notebook/2004/08/04/sq-4/#comment-4343 Tino Thu, 05 Aug 2004 23:23:59 +0000 http://www.simplebits.com/wp/notebook/2004/08/04/sq-4/#comment-4343 you guys are crazy .... IT'S "A" ... it's very simple. you guys are crazy ….
IT’S “A” … it’s very simple.

]]> http://simplebits.com/notebook/2004/08/04/sq-4/#comment-4342 Louis Thu, 05 Aug 2004 23:10:55 +0000 http://www.simplebits.com/wp/notebook/2004/08/04/sq-4/#comment-4342 I must admit that I've not read all of the comments. There are just too many! However, my opinion is that (X)HTML does not contain the expressiveness that we need in this situation. My typical response to this problem, would be to use XML (in the way nature -- er, sorry <a href="http://www.w3.com" rel="nofollow">W3</a> -- intended). So, I would plump for option D. Moreover, I'd use something similar to <a href="http://www.simplebits.com/notebook/2004/08/04/sq.html#comment9" rel="nofollow">Thomas's solution</a>. However, I am a fan of containment. Having to write seperate styling for the XML address would be a bit of a turn-off. The other sensible alternative would be option C or a variation on it, in my opinion. I must admit that I’ve not read all of the comments. There are just too many!
However, my opinion is that (X)HTML does not contain the expressiveness that we need in this situation. My typical response to this problem, would be to use XML (in the way nature — er, sorry W3 — intended).
So, I would plump for option D. Moreover, I’d use something similar to Thomas’s solution.
However, I am a fan of containment. Having to write seperate styling for the XML address would be a bit of a turn-off. The other sensible alternative would be option C or a variation on it, in my opinion.

]]> http://simplebits.com/notebook/2004/08/04/sq-4/#comment-4341 Nick Thu, 05 Aug 2004 22:59:09 +0000 http://www.simplebits.com/wp/notebook/2004/08/04/sq-4/#comment-4341 <em>Put commas in.</em> But commas aren't part of the address. Adding extra characters is just as bad as adding extra tags. Put commas in.
But commas aren’t part of the address. Adding extra characters is just as bad as adding extra tags.

]]> http://simplebits.com/notebook/2004/08/04/sq-4/#comment-4340 Jim Dabell Thu, 05 Aug 2004 22:53:44 +0000 http://www.simplebits.com/wp/notebook/2004/08/04/sq-4/#comment-4340 "You also have the accessibility problem of a screen reader just blasting through without pauses." Put commas in. “You also have the accessibility problem of a screen reader just blasting through without pauses.”
Put commas in.

]]>