In article <
bjh0pzadstc6.1k...@40tude.net>,
tlvp <
mPiOsUcB...@att.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 16:23:25 +1000, dorayme wrote:
>
> > ... the semantics
> > of the elements ...
>
> I'm sorry, dorayme: what exactly do you understand by that phrase?
> Is an element something like <img> or an opening/closing pair like
> <h2>...</h2>, <ul>...</ul>, or <div>...</div> ? If so, what can possibly be
> the *semantics* of such a thing?
>
Yes, an element is what an author uses when he uses tags. If he uses
<p>...</p> he is using a paragraph element. If he uses the tag <img
...>, he is using an image element. They are called these things
because there was an idea, which still has *some* merit, that they are
suitable for placing paragraphs and images onto the viewport or page.
In my own view the use of most of the elements was because of their
default styles (if you don't add any CSS styles, the browser will,
behind the scenes, use a default set). You can use a DIV or anything
really, even an <a> to make a paragraph (taken as the simple idea of a
set of continuous sentences hopefully containing a unitary theme,
separated top and bottom by a pause or line space) by setting your own
styles and the visual visitor to your site will be none the wiser. But
why bother?
Best to use a <p> because browsers will style it roughly how most of
us want it. You can tweak or add or adjust the style as you want but
you get a head start from the communal practice of browsers agreeing
on the defaults. <p> means a paragraph element because it is the
element that default styles to how we mostly want paragraphs to look.
As for semantics, we all know or should know that there have been some
big changes in how the most advanced and sophisticated web authors,
those with more than a mere practical bent, rather reflective people
(like J. Korpela), have come to be disenchanted with the former rather
glorious idea of semantic markup (patience tlvp, I'm coming to it) and
are now taking a far more practical view of web design. This does not
mean that because they are disenchanted with the former gospel of the
semantic markup and the separation of content and style, they have
lost all sensibility of some of the practical benefits of these
distinctions or are blind to bad design.
Semantic markup is simply marking up your page with the elements that
best fit in meaning what you are laying down. If it is a paragraph,
use a P, if it is a list, use an UL or OL and LIs. If you have a main
heading, use an H1, and subheadings depending on the logical order of
their meanings, intention, use H2, H3 on down as they become more and
more sub. If anything this is good author practice because it is a
rough guide to how to proceed.
You *can* use, say, mostly DIVs (the element that you use when you
don't really have a better more focussed element) and style the
various instances to look or sound the way you want but life is easier
if you get a head start and use as much as possible reliable elements
that are intended for a particular purpose (meaning, semantics).
Look, I'm just typing here quickly and not writing an essay. Hope this
helps a bit.
> (Grammar or Usage or even Syntax I could understand, but Semantics? Only
> things with meanings can be analyzed using semantics. What am I missing?)
>
> Sorry to appear so thick, or to be just trolling, but I just don't get it.
>
Don't worry tlvp, everyone knows you are a troll, I am a resident
troll too. We all are to various extents.
> Thanks, therefore (I hope), for as patient and clear an explanation as
> you've just given to poor masonc (who really *does* deserve better than
> certain others here have been dishing out to him).
--
dorayme