@tunnil - this is not a list of definitions. It is a ‘services’ page, describing the services provided, and talking about each service in some depth. We are not defining the services, we are discussing how they can help the reader, how you can benefit from them, and why you should use company X over company Y to be provided with them. So imho, a Definition List is not appropriate here.
The entire site has been coded in HTML5, hence its use. I’d rather not go off-topic into that one though lol.
How come Ralph?
But all of the services are individual services, not necessarily connected to one another, and can be used or purchased/employed on their own merits. So one is not needed by any other. They are all of ‘equal’ importance other than the way the business who provides said services wishes and chooses to promote or supply them. IE: a construction company may well do Windows and Doors, but you can bet that House Extensions and New Build Properties are of higher priority to them.
In that example, I would suggest the two ‘primary services’ (house extensions and new builds) would go into one Section (perhaps each inside an article? perhaps not), and the 'secondary services) inside another Section. No? I would like to hear any reasoning’s against this methodology.
See above.
Again, as per above, the content in each section CAN stand on its own (and perhaps should each have H1 tags).
IMHO, HTML5 is the future. People are using it now, and if you get used to using it now you can focus on learning other things whilst those who stic with HTML4/XHTML1.x trail behind to catch up. …not that I want to take this thread off topic at all.
[QUOTE=itmitică;5158562]I’d just use the semantic sectioning the headings (h1-h6) naturally provide. Something inherited from HTML4… …There is another way, making each set of services a section, but that’s up to the content, really.[/QUOTE]
Thanks for your input itmitica, I appreciate it; but wouldnt using the H1-H6 tags in that way create a sense that the content it all part of the same topic or item, closely related, but breaking down into further and further detail? I don’t feel that ‘fits’ the semantic behind the content. Each service is individual, and can be supplied on its own, and indeed companies out there exist solely to provide only one service of any within my primary, secondary and tertiary sections. Surely H1-H6 dont make clear the that the content under each heading is different and to a large extent, unrelated to one another?
I also would have to agree with your second point there, using sections as described. I feel this is a good ‘fit’ for the content, but would welcome your thoughts on this more… if you may?
[QUOTE=itmitică;5158562]For me, there are clear advantages today: no more ul and div for everything. Since HTML5 semantics is already supported extremely well by current browsers, HTML5 it’s not a fade promise anymore, it’s a future demand for web developers. It’s up to the web developer him or herself to properly learn and apply.[/QUOTE]
Again not wanting to get into this, but yes. I agree 100%.
[QUOTE=itmitică;5158562]
However, the same document would be more clearly expressed as:
<body>
<h1>Apples</h1>
<p>Apples are fruit.</p>
<section>
<h2>Taste</h2>
<p>They taste lovely.</p>
<section>
<h3>Sweet</h3>
<p>Red apples are sweeter than green ones.</p>
</section>
</section>
<section>
<h2>Color</h2>
<p>Apples come in various colors.</p>
</section>
</body>
[/QUOTE]
Is this not exactly what I have attempted to apply and do in my original code snippet posted in the opening post of this thread?
I used Sections to break up the differing categories of service (primary, secondary, tertiary), and inside each of those used H1-H6 tags to appropriately identify not only the title/name of each service, but also the importance of that service in relation to the company’s main goal. IE: H1 tagged services are primary, H2 tagged services as secondary, and so on. That is exactly what has been done in your code snippet above, but without the use of Articles. No?
Again, thanks to everyone who has commented and replied so far. I would love to hear more thoughts on this and of my comments above. I feel the thread is possibly near a solution/end? Does anyone have any other ideas or further comments to interject?