Dave Goodchild wrote: > I think it's a case of using id for javascript, not for css... Call me a purist, but quoting http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/ (and you can probably find likewise paragraphs in other xhtml specs, all stemming from the basic XML property that id's are unique): "4.10. The elements with 'id' and 'name' attributes HTML 4 defined the name attribute for the elements a, applet, form, frame, iframe, img, and map. HTML 4 also introduced the id attribute. Both of these attributes are designed to be used as fragment identifiers. In XML, fragment identifiers are of type ID, and there can only be a single attribute of type ID per element. Therefore, in XHTML 1.0 the id attribute is defined to be of type ID. In order to ensure that XHTML 1.0 documents are well-structured XML documents, XHTML 1.0 documents MUST use the id attribute when defining fragment identifiers on the elements listed above. See the HTML Compatibility Guidelines for information on ensuring such anchors are backward compatible when serving XHTML documents as media type text/html. Note that in XHTML 1.0, the name attribute of these elements is formally deprecated, and will be removed in a subsequent version of XHTML." So, using the same ID produces non-valid documents if you ask me. Best, Koen -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
