5 HTML elements you probably never use (but perhaps should)
http://www.seomoz.org/blogdetail.php?ID=1282
Especially fascinating, I think, is <optgroup> -- check out the "demo" shows why it's so handy.
<fieldset> and <legend> are pretty darn cool too :)
(via http://reddit.com/)
I wonder how far back support for some of these tags go. No browser support == no tag life.
Quote from: Mr. Analog on August 16, 2006, 10:04:12 AM
I wonder how far back support for some of these tags go. No browser support == no tag life.
I believe the article mentions how they are included in whatever version of the "official plan" for HTML... Notice there's no "deprecated" tags in there (that I could see anyway).
Quote from: Darren Dirt on August 16, 2006, 10:55:21 AM
Quote from: Mr. Analog on August 16, 2006, 10:04:12 AM
I wonder how far back support for some of these tags go. No browser support == no tag life.
I believe the article mentions how they are included in whatever version of the "official plan" for HTML... Notice there's no "deprecated" tags in there (that I could see anyway).
Sorry, I didn't mean the spec for HTML, I meant the browsers that implement the specs don't always include everything. There was a good amount of markup that both Netscape, Mozilla, Opera and Microsoft didn't implement, implemented weirdly or added themselves.
Yeah, I was sad to see that even the latest version of Firefox still hasn't implemented the does-everything-but-your-dishes <dirt> tag. :'(
Interesting how those tags all work in khtml :)
<address> is the only one i dont use. It should also have <col> added :)
Quote from: Shayne on August 16, 2006, 06:44:05 PM
It should also have <col> added :)
Wow, I agree after just briefly skimming this (http://www.htmlcodetutorial.com/tables/_COL.html).
Quote from: Tom on August 16, 2006, 06:36:33 PM
Interesting how those tags all work in khtml :)
KHTML -- the not-quite-full-featured (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_layout_engines_%28HTML%29) engine that is apparently even faster than Gecko (hence the reason that Safari, for example (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khtml#KHTML-based_applications) is indeed faster at rendering most pages). Another "new thing learned on the RW forums! :)
The only concern I have these days is that the javascript engine can be a fair bit slower. Some sites don't work quite so well, but I found that when doing my own web development, things did what I expected them to based on html/css documentation, whereas when loading the same code into firefox, things went to @%&#.
Though theres a project underway called Unity to merge Webkit (safari's basis) and KDE's khtml. Should be the basis for KDE4's khtml, and may be picked up by Apple as well, so there isn't two slightly different KHTML based engines (webkit and khtml itself).
Another interesting, yet useless fact, one of Unity's modules is called the Web Template Framework. WTF!
Wonder what WTF's "daily (http://thedailywtf.com/)" builds will be called ;)