 |
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
[WWW-HTML Mailing List Archive Home] [Messages By Thread] [Messages By Date] Re: <link> vs. <script> for external scripts
From: Lachlan Hunt <lhunt07@postoffice.csu.edu.au>
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 01:45:18 +1100 Message-ID: <3FBCD37E.8090508@postoffice.csu.edu.au> To: W3C HTML List <www-html@w3.org> > > >>I'm not even entirely sure that we need <noscript/>. What about: >> >><body onload="document.getElementById('noscript').style.display='none';"> >> <h1>Example</h1> >> <p id="noscript">This paragraph acts more or less the same as a >> <code><noscript/></code> element.</p> >></body> >> That would not work if there were multiple noscript sections, since they can't all have the same id. You would have to use the DOM to manipulate the style sheet rule for the class "noscript" instead. >Good one! I Didn't think of that one. >I absolutely agree. > >This is much nicer than the <noscript/> element and it eliminates the problems >with the content model of <noscript/>. > This would lose all the semantic value that having a <noscript> element provides. CYA ...LachyReceived on Thursday, 20 November 2003 09:45:55 GMT |
|
||||||||||||||||
