Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
User Journal

Journal eugene ts wong's Journal: EHTML: DIV, UL, & TITLE Elements 4

I've updated EHTML. I didn't think that any of you were using it, so I didn't bother making a backup copy of the previous version.

You can now optional add DIV and UL as children of HTML. TITLE is now a required child of BODY. The rationale for putting it there is that it encourages good titling of a page, as opposed to "Untitled", "New Page", "Our Web Site", etc. I think that leaving the title in the head section doesn't translate very well in the minds of new HTML authors. Also, it fits better in the document flow, and doesn't require css to get it into a correct position.

For example:

"-////DTD EHTML 1.0//EN" "">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
...banner and logo...
<li><a href="/">home</a></li>
<li><a href="/news/">news</li>
<li><a href="/contact">contact</li>
<body><title STYLE="display:block">My Foo Photos</title>
...insert content...

Disclaimer: some of the mistakes in the code are a result of slashdot; if you are interested in actual code, then let me know.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

EHTML: DIV, UL, & TITLE Elements

Comments Filter:
  • I disagree with your assessment of the title tag. Because the title is not actually part of the document - it is not content - it is a form of meta-data, therefore belonging in the document header. Imagine, if you will, if somewhere in any text file you were required to include the line:


    However, it is your DOM, and with it you are free to make HTML in your desired form. Just my .08 bit.
    • What makes it meta-data, and not actual content? According to W3C, it seems that we should be making very descriptive titles, which sounds like content to me.

      The title isn't supposed to be the file name, so I'm not too sure that I understand your illustration.

      I'm not trying to argue, though. Why do you feel that it's meta-data?
      • The file name was the first thing that came to mind. It was a weak illustration. I'll try to strengthen it a bit.

        You mention what is (to me) the very key: descriptive titles. They are supposed to be summaries, representative of the page content. When you have a half-dozen windows/tabs open, the Title is supposed to be your guide for locating the information you seek. It is a descriptor; it gives meaning to the document - through an otherwise unidentified browser window/tab - much in the same way a file nam
        • Re:Title (Score:2, Interesting)

          I think I understand your perspective on this: the title isn't framework; that headers should contain "external" data like character sets and such. The body is for the actual, active, if you will, content. That would follow with the div and ul outside of the body; they aren't content so much as they are structure. Am I even close?

          Yes, I think that you are right on target. It's just that often times I see the same information [title in the window or tab and the title in the body marked up with h1]. A paper e

The shortest distance between two points is under construction. -- Noelie Alito