The rules that I describe here apply to those elements as well. The element on its own is just a bitmap and does not provide information about any drawn objects. I’d always figured that the element had more use than for just images. Naurul: You use CSS attribute selectors for that, like, . The following table gives an non-exhaustive list of examples. Here is a common mistake made by html5doctor.com. By your logic, fast results, but not correct ones matter. Instead you should ensure that you always have a byte-order mark at the very start of a UTF-16 encoded file. It is never advisable to apply compatibility mappings indiscriminately. Would this have been a good example for http://html5doctor.com/blockquote-q-cite/ It seems a bit better than including footers etc in the blockquote. Text surrounded by tags is displayed with a bold typeface. My opinion is, that the following output example is a bad, but common mistake: @Alvin – yes, we wrote an article about that recently. DOM trees contain several kinds of nodes, in particular a DocumentType node, Element nodes, Text nodes, Comment nodes, and in some cases ProcessingInstruction nodes. Wouldn’t Given the ambiguity around using these supposedly more ‘semantic’ sectioning elements, I have to wonder what are the real benefits conferred by using them if most people are going to get it wrong and end up with a confusing document outline? maybe the tags and text are generated by a database that may at some point include more text and tags, if the content editor adds them. The problem, of course… Actually, let’s just do a thought experiment. } To specify that this content is related in some way even tho its not a blog or news sites. Thx for the enlightment! but I think it failed in every other respect and I hope many of the more useless elements become deprecated in the inevitable HTML6. http://www.accessibleculture.org/articles/2011/10/jaws-ie-and-headings-in-html5/. Don’t limit your
s to images. Thanks for the prompt :). Rather than worrying, just do the best you can safe in the knowledge that browsers will do their best to render your content, validate, and keep learning. How does one style multiple instances of footer on a page without confusing the browser ? When coding HTML in XML format, it was easy--because the validator forced you to code in a consistent manner. The second problem is another case of including elements when they’re not necessarily required. I assume that’s a set of typos though. Thinking semantically (and intuitively I would argue), I would wonder why, when looking at a page with several lists of links, that some merit a