What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Know a Book Lover? Give Them the Sony Reader Touch view!
bestbuy.com - It's sleek and light, stores hundreds of books and has a long lasting battery.
220 Comments
- jggube, on 03/24/2009, -5/+277Several of these are rare for a reason. For example, <wbr> doesn't validate even under W3C's XHTML 1.0 transitional specs. Also, in the example it should be: <span>How do you say Supercalifragilistic<wbr />expialidocious?</span> to self-close it.
Also, I only see 9 tags. because "rel" is an attribute. Additionally, contrary to the article, it is not available to ALL HTML tags if you care about web standards, cross-browser support, and validation at all. - VegaObscura3, on 03/24/2009, -2/+202<blink>
</blink> - cbulock, on 03/24/2009, -4/+123This article made me sad. The examples didn't even follow proper HTML design. It explains how to use labels, and in the very next example for the fieldset tag, labels aren't used. I hope nobody follows this as any type of authority on HTML. <wbr> isn't even a real tag!
- SushiCW, on 03/25/2009, -1/+111"It should be noted that none of these tags have full support across all browsers. "
Yeah, I'd say that's a pretty big caveat. - highPhone, on 03/25/2009, -2/+104<marquee>
best. tag. ever. - MtheoryX, on 03/24/2009, -9/+65My god. Read through the comments on that site. Readers pointed stuff out, he corrected in the article, repeat.
The readers should have written the article, not this douche. Buried as inaccurate. - inactive, on 03/25/2009, -10/+54outdated, outdated, useless, outdated, outdated, outdated, outdated...
- cloudberries, on 03/25/2009, -3/+39<sarcasm>That's a really useful article</sarcasm>
- gilbes, on 03/25/2009, -4/+36That is some ***** advice for the rel attribute because throwing in arbitrary values for scripting is not what it is for.
If you need some element to have some arbitrary attribute, you can just add one yourself. The W3C recommendations (aka "standards") allow it. <a href="me.html" title="ME!" *****="true">ME!</a> is perfectly valid and well supported.
And before a *****-storm of validation Nazis with superficial knowledge of how this ***** works comes storming in, read the XHTML spec, the whole thing. Yes, it will not validate against the W3 validator. That is because the W3 validator only validates against their own DTDs and schemas. You can create your own DTDs and/or schemas and validate your custom tags and attributes against it yourself, as per the standard. - branndon, on 03/25/2009, -2/+34I thought the <acronym> was kinda cool. Could be useful for SEO purposes I think.
- tacojohn48, on 03/25/2009, -0/+30especially when combined with the marquee tag
- wontstoptalking, on 03/24/2009, -6/+35</spare time>
- Stap1eGun, on 03/25/2009, -0/+25The label, abbr, and acronym tags are actually very useful from an accessibility standpoint.
- Jektal, on 03/25/2009, -1/+24<marquee><blink><span style="color:#FF0000; background-color: yellow;">UNDER CONSTRUCTION<img src="http://www.geocities.com/groups/web/~someoneElsesP ... alt="Annoying animation" />!!!</span></blink></marquee>
There, you have the 90's.
/too lazy to figure out what bright yellow is in hex RGB. - bingostud722, on 03/25/2009, -2/+23Your web design class was awful
- doshindude, on 03/25/2009, -5/+24There's a reason these are rare...
Most of those tags suck. - banmeagaindigg, on 03/25/2009, -1/+20</obvious>
- RandyWalker, on 03/25/2009, -0/+18U and s are non-semantic, purely visual tags and are deprecated. ins and del have semantic meaning, and are thus preferred.
- inactive, on 03/25/2009, -0/+17Would you like a medal or something?
- rnawky, on 03/25/2009, -4/+20I heard IE can correctly render like 4 of these.
- TPHigginbotham, on 03/25/2009, -0/+16The W3C "recommendations" don't "allow" the creation of arbitrary HTML/XHTML attributes. In fact, the W3C "recommends" you follow the rules that they've spent countless hours debating -- it would be stupid for them to recommend you ignore their work and create your own. Because of that, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you meant "specifications" instead of "recommendations."
For most websites, there is no need to create a custom DTD, and telling people they can just make up attributes and still have a valid HTML/XHTML document is misleading. I'm not saying that custom DTDs don't have their uses, but the way you went about explaining it could have been better.
If anyone out there actually needs to create attributes that are outside of the specs, please read: http://www.alistapart.com/articles/customdtd/ - inactive, on 03/25/2009, -3/+18On the other hand, if it's a corrected article then that's good... isn't it?
- dygel, on 03/25/2009, -0/+14His example was bad, though. In one example, he used it properly to fill in the full term for "SEO", but in another he used it to indicate Twitter was Founded in 2008.
The real value to the acronym tag is for screen readers. If you're looking at the text, you can see that SEO is in all caps, it's clearly an acronym. It's an issue of context for you to realize that it's an acronym. However, for people using screen readers, "SEO" would be interpreted as just another word unless you use the acronym tag. Then it would be read out loud as S-E-O rather than seo. - MediaCrisis, on 03/25/2009, -1/+15I second your nerd rant. Give me valid markup or give me death!
- inactive, on 03/25/2009, -0/+13Pick between Web Standards and validation?
Are you sure about that? - haikuFU, on 03/25/2009, -0/+13That was the best episode of the new Dr..
- inactive, on 03/25/2009, -0/+13Not that you'd want to EVER use <wbr /> anyway....
- MeatMountain, on 03/25/2009, -2/+14<BLINK>10 Rare HTML Tags You Really Should Know!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!OMG</BLINK>
- cloudberries, on 03/25/2009, -0/+12This, a thousand times over
- olliholliday, on 03/25/2009, -2/+14pretty shockingly inaccurate practically all the way through.
he doesnt know what acronym means, he confuses label with legend, he's describing tags that don't even exist in the specification, and he used optgroup, address and cite totally incorrectly.
by my count he didn't get even 1/10 right.
buried. - mcprogrammer, on 03/25/2009, -0/+12wbr doesn't validate in HTML either: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/index/elements.html
- CaptainChad, on 03/25/2009, -3/+15The article describes HTML. Unlike XML and XHTML, the HTML specification does not allow one to self-close a tag with a forward slash. Browsers will accept them without complaining, but they will cause validation errors in a pure HTML page.
- gerryk, on 03/25/2009, -0/+11<span> and inline styles are hardly 90s
try <table><tr><td><table><tr><td><td/><td><td/><td><td/><tr/><tr><td><td/><td><td/><td><td/><tr/><tr><td><td/><td><td/><td><td/><tr/><tr><td><td/><td><marquee></marquee><td/><td><blink></blink><td/><tr/><tr><td><td/><td><td/><td><td/><tr/><tr><td><td/><td><td/><td><td/><tr/><tr><td><td/><td><td/><td><td/><tr/><tr><td><td/><td><td/><td><td/><tr/></table></td></tr></table> - dave122, on 03/25/2009, -0/+11http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=ht ...
le sigh. - winry, on 03/25/2009, -0/+11Also, the fieldset tag really look better if you set a border, in fact I'm pretty sure that's the point of fieldset/legend.
http://www.456bereastreet.com/lab/styling-form-con ... - h0dges, on 03/25/2009, -0/+11deprecated deprecated deprecated deprecated deprecated
- dingram09, on 03/25/2009, -0/+11You forgot the Autoplay music.
- csapdani, on 03/25/2009, -0/+10</fail>
- jeexbit, on 03/25/2009, -1/+11I'll just stick with <pre> thanks...
- Jough, on 03/25/2009, -0/+9Don't tell me you forgot about the <font> tag! Nobody used styles in the 90's. It was:
<font color="yellow" style="Times New Roman"></font> - kahn2001, on 03/25/2009, -1/+10@mcprogrammer, Microsoft's own website has XHTML ;-)
- alpha88, on 03/25/2009, -4/+13But generally if you want good, cross-browser, validated code, you should be using XHTML anyway.
- inactive, on 03/25/2009, -4/+13If you don't like nerds, then stop using all technology.
- benologist, on 03/25/2009, -3/+11Most tags are "rare" in the sense that there's probably only a dozen most developers use on a daily basis anyway.
- Jektal, on 03/25/2009, -0/+8Did he use the INS and DEL tags to mark his revisions?
- jrapp, on 03/25/2009, -0/+8Inline styles? Pffft! Use the <font> tag like a real man!
- Wazzog, on 03/25/2009, -1/+8Would've been good had he shown correct use of tags such as <optgroup>.
Where the <optgroup> tag should be around the options not just sitting at the front of them.
For example:
<OPTGROUP label=1PM><OPTION value=titanic selected>Twister</OPTION> <OPTION value=nd>Napoleon Dynamite</OPTION> <OPTION value=wab>What About Bob?</OPTION></OPTGROUP>
Also noone should capitalise tags. - Smuikas, on 03/25/2009, -0/+7Oh come on, it's #FFFF00. Duh!
- Fleagleman, on 03/25/2009, -0/+7Because Digg users who remember how Digg used to be (way before stupid images, horrible top 10 lists, and bad comic strips dominated the front page) want to be reminded of the good ol' days.
- StuartGibson, on 06/14/2009, -3/+1070% my arse. On most of my sites IE has sub 20% share.
A real designer/developers knows you use the stuff that will benefit the majority of your visitors. On some sites IE will have 70% share, on some it will have 5%. You take the numbers for your particular site into consideration when doing anything. -
Show 51 - 100 of 230 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is ![http://www.geocities.com/groups/web/~someoneElsesP ...](http://www.geocities.com/groups/web/~someoneElsesPage/constructionAnimation.gif"){kind=link}