![]() |
|
![]() |
||
![]() |
![]() |
|
[WWW-HTML Mailing List Archive Home] [Messages By Thread] [Messages By Date] Re: how is this Strict valid?
From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2006 15:14:07 +0000 Message-ID: <458BF63F.1020603@splintered.co.uk> To: www-html@w3.org Tina Holmboe wrote: > "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." - quote the XHTML 1.0 spec. > > I wouldn't call it "perfectly ok". Then we'll agree to disagree here. If there's a valid reason for using it, even if it's deprecated but still present, I'd call that perfectly ok (as long as the developer is aware of it). P -- Patrick H. Lauke __________________________________________________________ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __________________________________________________________ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __________________________________________________________Received on Friday, 22 December 2006 15:14:30 GMT |
|
||||||||||||||||