Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Come for the quick hacks, stay for the epiphanies.
 
PerlMonks  

Re: _new considered harmful

by wazoox (Prior)
on Oct 02, 2006 at 19:54 UTC ( [id://575939]=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to _new considered harmful

_blank is certainly harmful, it's not even valid XHTML after all. I personnaly hate _blank : I'm perfectly able to open a link in a new tab or window if that's what I want. And actually, I hardly ever want to open a new window anyway.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: _new considered harmful
by ikegami (Patriarch) on Oct 02, 2006 at 20:51 UTC

    Update: Oh! I think you meant "_new is certainly harmful", instead of "_blank is certainly harmful". Ignore the rest of this post if so.

    Why do you say it's not valid XHTML? According to the XHTML DTD, the value of target is a NMTOKEN. _blank is a valid NMTOKEN.

    Nmtoken ::= (NameChar)+ NameChar ::= Letter | Digit | '.' | '-' | '_' | ':' | CombiningChar | +Extender

    Futhermore, it's not list as a difference with HTML 4, and HTML 4 explicitely lists _blank as a valid frame target name. (_new, on the other hand, is not listed.)

      Check with the w3c validator : any xhtml page containing
      <a href="foo" target="_blank">
      will be dubbed as non valid XHTML strict. Well, actually that's the "target" attribute that's invalid, not "_blank".
        It's defined in the Frameset DTD. Frames are valid XHTML, but they have in a seperate DTD since they have affect presentation.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://575939]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this?Last hourOther CB clients
Other Users?
Others taking refuge in the Monastery: (11)
As of 2024-03-28 09:07 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found