php processing name vs. id field
in [General]
|
Prev: Past discussion
Next: Integers
From: Adam Richardson on 2 Jul 2010 14:03 On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Peter Lind <peter.e.lind(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 2 July 2010 19:52, Adam Richardson <simpleshot(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 12:28 PM, <Kirk.Johnson(a)zootweb.com> wrote: > > > >> "Bob McConnell" <rvm(a)CBORD.com> wrote on 07/02/2010 08:53:30 AM: > >> > >> > > Arguments against using/dismissing the "name" attribute in tags is > >> > > simply nonsense. > >> > > >> > This discussion began when I pointed out that the name attribute is > >> > deprecated in XHTML. This was later confirmed when someone pointed to > >> > the actual specification at <http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/>, however > >> > there may be some confusion about the scope of the change. The > >> > applicable section is shown below. Apparently HTML 5 is planning to > take > >> > a different path. Of course, nobody knows that for sure since the spec > >> > is far from complete and will likely be undergoing major changes for > >> > several more years. > >> > > >> > Bob McConnell > >> > > >> > -----8<------------------------------------------------ > >> > 4.10. The elements with 'id' and 'name' attributes > >> > > >> > HTML 4 defined the name attribute for the elements a, applet, form, > >> > frame, iframe, img, and map. HTML 4 also introduced the id attribute. > >> > Both of these attributes are designed to be used as fragment > >> > identifiers. > >> > > >> > In XML, fragment identifiers are of type ID, and there can only be a > >> > single attribute of type ID per element. Therefore, in XHTML 1.0 the > id > >> > attribute is defined to be of type ID. In order to ensure that XHTML > 1.0 > >> > documents are well-structured XML documents, XHTML 1.0 documents MUST > >> > use the id attribute when defining fragment identifiers on the > elements > >> > listed above. See the HTML Compatibility Guidelines for information on > >> > ensuring such anchors are backward compatible when serving XHTML > >> > documents as media type text/html. > >> > > >> > 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. > >> > >> At the risk of injecting a little light into this discussion ;) note the > >> list of elements in the excerpt Bob provided: a, applet, form, frame, > >> iframe, img, and map. Almost all replies to date have referred to the > name > >> attribute of the *form elements*: input, select, and textarea. Two > >> different sets of elements. > >> > >> As far as I am concerned, the "authorities" are free to remove the name > >> attribute from the first set. I think it is safe to say that the name > >> attribute will not be removed from the *form elements* anytime soon. > >> > >> For all with a holiday coming up this weekend, have a good one! > >> > >> Kirk > > > > > > Hi Kirk, > > > > You beat me to it, that's exactly the issue at hand in this debate. Name > IS > > deprecated (both in newer versions of HTML and XHTML) for those > particular > > elements: > > http://derickrethans.nl/html-name-attribute-deprecated.html > > > > As Derrick points out on that page, "always read the specs carefully" ;) > > > > That was pointed out more than a day ago ... > > > -- > <hype> > WWW: http://plphp.dk / http://plind.dk > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/plind > BeWelcome/Couchsurfing: Fake51 > Twitter: http://twitter.com/kafe15 > </hype> > Sorry, Peter, I didn't realize you'd addressed this in a previous message. I saw the new messages today and wanted to make sure the distinction had been made. Adam -- Nephtali: PHP web framework that functions beautifully http://nephtaliproject.com
From: Peter Lind on 2 Jul 2010 14:09
On 2 July 2010 20:03, Adam Richardson <simpleshot(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Peter Lind <peter.e.lind(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 2 July 2010 19:52, Adam Richardson <simpleshot(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> > On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 12:28 PM, <Kirk.Johnson(a)zootweb.com> wrote: >> > >> >> "Bob McConnell" <rvm(a)CBORD.com> wrote on 07/02/2010 08:53:30 AM: >> >> >> >> > > Arguments against using/dismissing the "name" attribute in tags is >> >> > > simply nonsense. >> >> > >> >> > This discussion began when I pointed out that the name attribute is >> >> > deprecated in XHTML. This was later confirmed when someone pointed to >> >> > the actual specification at <http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/>, however >> >> > there may be some confusion about the scope of the change. The >> >> > applicable section is shown below. Apparently HTML 5 is planning to >> take >> >> > a different path. Of course, nobody knows that for sure since the spec >> >> > is far from complete and will likely be undergoing major changes for >> >> > several more years. >> >> > >> >> > Bob McConnell >> >> > >> >> > -----8<------------------------------------------------ >> >> > 4.10. The elements with 'id' and 'name' attributes >> >> > >> >> > HTML 4 defined the name attribute for the elements a, applet, form, >> >> > frame, iframe, img, and map. HTML 4 also introduced the id attribute. >> >> > Both of these attributes are designed to be used as fragment >> >> > identifiers. >> >> > >> >> > In XML, fragment identifiers are of type ID, and there can only be a >> >> > single attribute of type ID per element. Therefore, in XHTML 1.0 the >> id >> >> > attribute is defined to be of type ID. In order to ensure that XHTML >> 1.0 >> >> > documents are well-structured XML documents, XHTML 1.0 documents MUST >> >> > use the id attribute when defining fragment identifiers on the >> elements >> >> > listed above. See the HTML Compatibility Guidelines for information on >> >> > ensuring such anchors are backward compatible when serving XHTML >> >> > documents as media type text/html. >> >> > >> >> > 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. >> >> >> >> At the risk of injecting a little light into this discussion ;) note the >> >> list of elements in the excerpt Bob provided: a, applet, form, frame, >> >> iframe, img, and map. Almost all replies to date have referred to the >> name >> >> attribute of the *form elements*: input, select, and textarea. Two >> >> different sets of elements. >> >> >> >> As far as I am concerned, the "authorities" are free to remove the name >> >> attribute from the first set. I think it is safe to say that the name >> >> attribute will not be removed from the *form elements* anytime soon. >> >> >> >> For all with a holiday coming up this weekend, have a good one! >> >> >> >> Kirk >> > >> > >> > Hi Kirk, >> > >> > You beat me to it, that's exactly the issue at hand in this debate. Â Name >> IS >> > deprecated (both in newer versions of HTML and XHTML) for those >> particular >> > elements: >> > http://derickrethans.nl/html-name-attribute-deprecated.html >> > >> > As Derrick points out on that page, "always read the specs carefully" ;) >> > >> >> That was pointed out more than a day ago ... >> >> >> -- >> <hype> >> WWW: http://plphp.dk / http://plind.dk >> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/plind >> BeWelcome/Couchsurfing: Fake51 >> Twitter: http://twitter.com/kafe15 >> </hype> >> > > Sorry, Peter, > > I didn't realize you'd addressed this in a previous message. Â I saw the new > messages today and wanted to make sure the distinction had been made. > And on that notion, let me apologize for my obvious overreaction. It's great that people are so helpful here :) Regards Peter -- <hype> WWW: http://plphp.dk / http://plind.dk LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/plind BeWelcome/Couchsurfing: Fake51 Twitter: http://twitter.com/kafe15 </hype> |