Sam Alexander wrote:
i thought you could use a <br> in css. i haven't gotten into css though
so i looked it up. it seems <p> is more favored..
http://www.ozzu.com/ftopic58344.html
It's not really that it's favored per say, they serve two different function >> There are times where a <p> should be used instead.
Also, according to the new specs <br> is now <br />.
You are correct, but I think unless you specify HTML 4.01 Strict the
browser won't complain if you use <br>. I think the W3C likes to change stuff just to change it... I still use <b> and <i> instead of <strong> and
<em> just because it's hard to get out of old habits.
First, I think a lot of html 4.01 strict was movement towards XHTML, which
imo is a good thing, since the markup rules are more well defined, and easier to test for and parse.
Use of em and strong over i and b tags, are mainly a function over form...
you have a strong test, or emphasized text, instead of defining style with the
tagname, which is poorer form, given css's role.
example, using a css class of "red_text" over "error_text" is probably
equally bad.. I use naming generally for the ansi colors.. I've been working
to change most of the tagging in my website, because the colors are darker on non-windows machines, and want them to be more comparable in *nix and mac.
This is an exception to the rule.. you want your tags and roles to be more generic, allowing for display specifics to be defined in the stylesheet, where they can be tweaked, without changing the actual markup.
--
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1(at)theroughnecks(dot)net - www.theroughnecks.net icq: 4935386 - AIM/AOL: azTracker1 - Y!: azTracker1 - MSN/Win: (email)
---
þ Synchronet þ theroughnecks.net - you know you want it