«

Mark Parnell wrote:

> Previously in alt.html, Roy Schestowitz <>
> said:
>
>> http://werbach.com/barebones/
>
> I haven't seen that site before. It's not as bad as some of the others
> around, but I still wouldn't even consider recommending it. It's very
> outdated - no mention of CSS at all, and it's based on HTML4.0, which
> was superseded by HTML4.01 5 years ago. In fact, the site itself hasn't
> been updated in nearly 6 years. On the Internet that's a lifetime (or
> several). Not a resource to be used now.

I have only been using it as a quick reference to, let us say, find the
attribute for cellpadding in a table. It does the trick.

Roy

--
Roy Schestowitz
http://schestowitz.com

In article <UHSqd.53202$>, rf
(rf@.invalid) dropped a +5 bundle of words...

> Starshine Moonbeam
> >
> > Fair enough. I just thought people used tag and element interchangably
> > with element being right and tag for convienence. I didn't know there
> > was an actual definition for tag. Whoops.
>
> http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/intro/sgmltut.html#h-3.2
>
>

What would <br/> or <img> be? Would it be a tag or a one sided element?

--
Starshine Moonbeam
mhm31x9 Smeeter#29 WSD#30
sTaRShInE_mOOnBeAm aT HoTmAil dOt CoM

In article <>, Starshine Moonbeam
() dropped a +5 bundle of words...

> In article <UHSqd.53202$>, rf
> (rf@.invalid) dropped a +5 bundle of words...
>
> > Starshine Moonbeam
> > >
> > > Fair enough. I just thought people used tag and element interchangably
> > > with element being right and tag for convienence. I didn't know there
> > > was an actual definition for tag. Whoops.
> >
> > http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/intro/sgmltut.html#h-3.2
> >
> >
>
> What would <br/> or <img> be? Would it be a tag or a one sided element?
>
>

Never mind, it's an empty element.

--
Starshine Moonbeam
mhm31x9 Smeeter#29 WSD#30
sTaRShInE_mOOnBeAm aT HoTmAil dOt CoM

Starshine Moonbeam dropped the 3 letter word:

> In article <>, Neal
> () dropped a +5 bundle of words...
>> So <h1> is an element???
>
> Yes.

....and now we're down to semantics. <h1> is a tag from a programmatic
point-of-view and <h1>blog</h1> is an HTML element. No?

Roy

--
Roy Schestowitz
http://schestowitz.com

In article <>,
says...
> On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 03:07:22 GMT, rf <rf@.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Roy Schestowitz opined.
> >
> >> Although this source was criticised by alt.html before, I choose to
> >> recommend it again:
> >>
> >> http://werbach.com/barebones/
> >
> > Oh my.
> >
> > <quote>
> > The Bare Bones Guide to HTML lists every official HTML tag in common
> > usage,
> > </quote>
> >
> > Element. It is HTML Element. Not tag.
>
> So <h1> is not a tag?

If I understand correctly, <h1> when used on a page is a tag, but h1
itself is known as an element.

But then I might not understand correctly.

--
Dan Ruscoe

Neal wrote:
> rf wrote:

> So the element is delimited by a tag or pair of tags, no?

No. The element *contains* a start tag and an end tag.

> Yes, the tag(s) plus the content (if not empty) comprise the element.

Yes. Although sometimes one or more of these things are optional.

> Of course, I agree with you rf, but using the term 'tag" isn't cause
> enough to trash a site.

It is not as per the recommendation. It is not concise and is totally open
to the readers misinterpretation.

Couple that with the questions you see here from the newbies. They think
elements are tags, attributes are tags, style rules are tags, properties are
tags and that tags are commands.

Tell them their tag is missing a ; and it means nothing. Tell them their
property-value pair is missing a ; and it makes sense.

Here is what W3C have to say:
http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/intro/sgmltut.html#h-3.2

Scroll down a bit to the green bit where they say:
Elements are not tags. ...

So, the recommendation states it rather forcefully (for the recommendation).
Why should we not use what the recommendation says?

> Well, it depends on how "tags" are taught.

They (and HTML for that matter) are usually taught wrongly.

--
Cheers
Richard.

Starshine Moonbeam wrote:

> > What would <br/> or <img> be? Would it be a tag or a one sided element?

> Never mind, it's an empty element.

Good work. I was just about to suggest you search the entry in the
recommendations

--
Cheers
Richard.

In article <uUSqd.53215$>, rf
(rf@.invalid) dropped a +5 bundle of words...

> Starshine Moonbeam wrote:
>
> > > What would <br/> or <img> be? Would it be a tag or a one sided element?
>
> > Never mind, it's an empty element.
>
> Good work. I was just about to suggest you search the entry in the
> recommendations
>
>

thx.

--
Starshine Moonbeam
mhm31x9 Smeeter#29 WSD#30
sTaRShInE_mOOnBeAm aT HoTmAil dOt CoM

In article <cogtdj$2t11$>, Roy Schestowitz
() dropped a +5 bundle of words...

> Starshine Moonbeam dropped the 3 letter word:
>
> > In article <>, Neal
> > () dropped a +5 bundle of words...
> >> So <h1> is an element???
> >
> > Yes.
>
> ...and now we're down to semantics. <h1> is a tag from a programmatic
> point-of-view and <h1>blog</h1> is an HTML element. No?

Yeah, I was wrong before elements have opening and closing tags.

Now I know. Yo Joe!



--
Starshine Moonbeam
mhm31x9 Smeeter#29 WSD#30
sTaRShInE_mOOnBeAm aT HoTmAil dOt CoM

Previously in alt.html, Roy Schestowitz <>
said:

> I have only been using it as a quick reference to, let us say, find the
> attribute for cellpadding in a table. It does the trick.

cellpadding perhaps?

Try these instead:
http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/index/attributes.html
http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/index/elements.html

--
Mark Parnell
http://www.clarkecomputers.com.au
"Never drink rum&coke whilst reading usenet" - rf 2004