Comment from Roger Johansson
And wouldn't it have been nice if I had also included a link to the relevant part of the specification.
View ArticleComment from Roger Johansson
For what it's worth, the current working draft of HTML 5 is much clearer on this:The address element must not be used to represent arbitrary addresses (e.g. postal addresses), unless those addresses...
View ArticleComment from Craig C.
In Transcending CSS, see the sidebar note on page 86. Malarkey is right, all of this confusion is the result of unfortunate naming of the element. When I first learned of it I thought what everyone...
View ArticleComment from Jonathan Snook
@Malarkey: I probably missed where that actually got mentioned. On page 43, where you talk of microformats, you've used the address element in a way that would be accurate but I read as being all...
View ArticleComment from Malarkey
"In neither case did the authors explain how or why the element should be used. In fact, it seemed implied that it should be used to mark up any postal address that might find its way onto a web page."...
View ArticleComment from trovster
@ Jeff: Some microformats such as hAtom, and hCalendar use the ABBR element. This is called the datetime-design-pattern. But mostly, microformats are 'just class names' with a few rel and title...
View ArticleComment from Jeff Croft
As I said above, in both books, the message seemed to come across as, "don't use a paragraph tag, use an address tag!" It may not be how it was intended but that's the way it came across to me. Yeah,...
View ArticleComment from Nate Abele
My 2 pennies on the may/may only issue: look at the context. If 'must' was used, it would have implied that the <address /> element must always appear within a <form />, which is clearly...
View ArticleComment from Kasimir K
However, one only has to look at the use of "may" in other places within the W3C spec Actually one has to look at the spec on these keywords - not go guessing... Using <address> is optional, but...
View ArticleComment from Jonathan Snook
@Ian/Michael: Ack! Yes, I must concede on the 'only' qualifier. I do believe there were other examples and I may have chosen poorly. @Jeff: I certainly understand that the book is about CSS but the...
View ArticleComment from trovster
@ Michael Moncur: I personally would never use the ADDRESS element to markup up an email address. I would also use an anchor, so it's clickable, and usable with the users address book/email...
View ArticleComment from Michael Moncur
I have absolutely no idea which is the correct use of 'address', but I have to disagree with your linguistics. There's a big difference between "may" and "may only". Example: 1. You may have a cookie....
View ArticleComment from Jeff Croft
Well, first off, Pro CSS Techniques is about CSS, not about (X)HTML, so it doesn't go into a lot of detail about markup at all. Examples of how or why the address element should be used would...
View ArticleComment from Ian
While I agree with your statements, I don't agree with your comparitive example: Unlike A, it may only appear in the HEAD section of a document. The reason being, there is a significant difference...
View ArticleComment from Roger Johansson
And wouldn't it have been nice if I had also included a link to the relevant part of the specification.
View ArticleComment from Roger Johansson
For what it's worth, the current working draft of HTML 5 is much clearer on this:The address element must not be used to represent arbitrary addresses (e.g. postal addresses), unless those addresses...
View ArticleComment from Craig C.
In Transcending CSS, see the sidebar note on page 86. Malarkey is right, all of this confusion is the result of unfortunate naming of the element. When I first learned of it I thought what everyone...
View ArticleComment from Jonathan Snook
@Malarkey: I probably missed where that actually got mentioned. On page 43, where you talk of microformats, you've used the address element in a way that would be accurate but I read as being all...
View Article
