[thelist] skipping 'hx' levels is bad

[rudy]

> ... again, doesn't mean you *shouldn't* use h# to impart structure, does
it?

right

in fact the prevalent interpretation, that hx headers form a hierarchical
or nested structure, is definitely a good one

all i'm saying that this is just the prima facie interpretation, and there
may be other ways of looking at it

you mentioned the table of contents somewhere back in this thread...

aside:  back in the 80's i worked with a couple of ibm systems called dcf
and gml (document composition facility and generalized markup language),
and there was this neat function that took a pass through the document, as
it was being formatted, gathered the headers, and created the table of
contents automagically (and if you were smart, you'd put it at the end, to
avoid the second pass, then simpy shuffle those pages to the front after
the doc was printed)

anyhow, the idea is that the table of content reflects the document
structure

all you need to do is pick up any book and see that the entries in a table
of contents are *not* all h2

the preface, appendixes, et cetera, are not only styled different, but
*semantically* different from the chapters

by "raising" all subheadings within the h1 hierarchy, by making them all
h2s, you are *making them equal* in structure, and all i'm saying is that
structurally, sure, that's trivial, everything structurally is under the
body...

... but semantically, there's a difference between the preface and
appendixes and the regular chapters

just like the secretary isn't really the same as curly, larry and moe

the w3c says the different header numbers are for differences in
*importance*

so that's my story and i'm sticking to it

;o)

> IOW, do what you want, folks, neither rudy nor i is
> a final arbiter on the proper use of the h#...

amen to that

rudy