Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
5 HTML elements you probably never use (but perhaps should)
seomoz.org — This is a collection of HTML elements I've found to be very under-represented in markup on the web today.
Oatmeal- 3637 diggs
- digg it
- nreynolds, on 10/12/2007, -236/+6This is a collection of article postings I've found to be very boring in digg on the web today.
- spect3r, on 10/12/2007, -3/+90Then why did you click it? Why are you even in the "technology/design" section to begin with.
Digg isn't just all youtube and flash game links you know. - wordsofwisedumb, on 10/12/2007, -3/+63The above comment by nreynolds is a posting I've found to be very boring on digg on the web today.
- zigamorph, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11I actually found this article very interesting. I learned that there is a "q" tag and it is used to quote text. I would have never known that if I didn't read this. Also the use of everything else gave me some insight in to some tags I am going to be using in the future.
- crawf061, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10"The internet, or 'interweb', is full of bitchin content, said Matt, If I were to surf the interweb I'd totally do it nekkid"
Nice example of the quote tag - i440, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7The "marquee" tag is not present!
A truly serious ommission, I would have to say. - jokerr, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1i440 wrote The "marquee" tag is not present! A truly serious ommission, I would have to say.
Correct me if I'm wrong that the marquee was an IE only element. - marillion, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12They didn't include the LABEL tag. One of my pet peeves for a long time was that in most applications, you can check a radio button or check box by clicking of the label. This facilitates Fits' Law by giving a larger target. The HTML label tag is how it's done on the web.
- spect3r, on 10/12/2007, -3/+90Then why did you click it? Why are you even in the "technology/design" section to begin with.
- ActiveMatx, on 10/12/2007, -1/+55Wow, good article. Not only did I not know these elements existed, but I have never seen a lot of them even implemented!
- jjk5, on 10/12/2007, -26/+12Well, if you didn't know they existed, you certainly wouldn't have noticed them being implemented, right?
- headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13I've seen the fieldset and legend tags being used more and more, but I've never heard of the other ones.
The quotes tag is the coolest of the group, and of course(!) IE doesn't support it. - takeda, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I think fieldset is more popular because XHTML requires it in (at least the w3c validator screams when it's absent)
- takeda, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I think that's a bug in digg, instead stripping the tags it should just show them as a text... BTW: I meant <form> in the above post.
- kimos, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Yeah, digg for being the top five of something and still being awesome. Digg also for making a bold statment as the title and actually following through!
- nofxjunkee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I knew about them all except [q], though I do forget about [address]. They are all useful, good write up.
- rasterbator, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2These are great tips. Will these work in IE8? /sarcasm
- iAlex, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16Very useful! Thanks!
- Veamon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Not bad, not bad...may have to use some of these in the future.
- threemagic, on 10/12/2007, -42/+0There's a lot more than 5 HTML elements that I won't use...
- surfing, on 10/12/2007, -2/+40On your MySpace website.
- directandy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14those are awesome. definate digg.
- 4to15characters, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11none of these are THAT useful, but now that i've said that, i will probably end up finding a way to use them :P
nice find
digg from me :D- wembley, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Visually they're nifty, but the real benefit of these come in when you look at accessibility for people using screen readers. I've trialed a few screen-readers as part of accessibility testing and let me tell you, dealing with sites using them can be quite painful - so every little semantic/structural clue you can give helps.
ie. Using and in your forms and the (good) screen readers voice-back much nicer contextual information as your tab about. (table header) is another (slightly better known) one that really helps but is often forgotten). - wembley, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1ack... it stripped out the tags (was talking about <fieldset> <label for="[inputname]"> and <TH>)
- wembley, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Visually they're nifty, but the real benefit of these come in when you look at accessibility for people using screen readers. I've trialed a few screen-readers as part of accessibility testing and let me tell you, dealing with sites using them can be quite painful - so every little semantic/structural clue you can give helps.
- addicted68098, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11I feel specail, I use 3/5 of them, I didn't know that fieldset was an odd element, you see it used all the time.
- illicium, on 10/12/2007, -17/+6..yet you don't use the digg spellchecker.
- KWhat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2fieldset is kind of new... actually all of these elements must be somewhat new because they were never a part of HTML when I was using it heavaly (version 3.2 and 4.01).
- Oatmeal, on 10/12/2007, -3/+28blink tag ftw
marquee too.- myheaditches, on 10/12/2007, -1/+21Best user style sheet ever:
body{text-decoration:blink;} - Continuum, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12The inventor of the blink tag, Lou Montulli, has said repeatedly in interviews that he considers "the blink tag to be the worst thing I've ever done for the Internet".
Found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blink_tag - pucosk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Much better:
* { text-decoration:blink; color: cyan; background: pink }
That's the default for each of my gay MySpace profiles.
Other then that I'm using 3/5 (maybe coz I never had to present an address or quote sth).
- myheaditches, on 10/12/2007, -1/+21Best user style sheet ever:
- motionblur, on 10/12/2007, -11/+7Jakob Neilson would have a field day explaining why optgroup and acronym should not be used. It breaks the natural behaviour users have come to expect from a drop-down box. The same goes for the acronym tag. Underlined text is always expected to be a clickable hyperlink element, not some other behaviour.
- psyon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16You can always style the ABBR tag to not underline it. With reguards to optgroup, I have found that users love it when there are large option lists.
- chadu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7you could probably style the acronym tag to not have an underline.
text-decoration:none; should work. - headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12I don't agree in regards to the optgroup tags. All the time I see "hacks" being used where this tag would work perfectly. Hacks that look like:
-- Animals --
Cat
Dog
-- Fish --
Carp
Shark
If the acronym tag can be styled, and I'm sure it can, then change it so it's not underlined. - atmofunk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15...plus without optgroup you have to write extra code to handle the occasion when someone accidentally selects what is *supposed* to be a group header. OPTGROUP is def an elegant way around this.
- Goner, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9I think Jakob would have a field day telling you to never speak for him again...
- twollamalove, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Well, maybe if Jakob Neilson was blind and needed a program to convey important information to him in a special way, he would realize that this is not 1997 and seperating data from design (for several user classes) is more important that his dumbass inability to distinguish a hyperlink.
- motionblur, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2The responses to my comment are suprising. They make several assuptions and show ignorance of Web standards. The acronym, abbr and optgroup tags do not have full cross-browser CSS support, so many of the mentioned solutions would not work (without JavaScript hacks). Otherwise those tags would be incredibly useful.
@Goner and twollamalover : Excellent trolling!
- spect3r, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Another one you don't see a lot of is the < button > tag, instead people use < input >
Sure, it doesn't do much; but it still has its applicaitons.- joeblade, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Internet Explorer has problems with the < button > tag, as it will pass the contents of the tag to the form handler rather than whatever is specified in the button's value attribute, which isn't what other browsers do.
May as well just use the input tag with a type attribute of 'button'.
- joeblade, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Internet Explorer has problems with the < button > tag, as it will pass the contents of the tag to the form handler rather than whatever is specified in the button's value attribute, which isn't what other browsers do.
- that, on 10/12/2007, -17/+6Hunh, well, I'm a web designer, and I've heard of all those except for . To be perfectly honest, and are the only tags in there that are truly useful. CSS styles are, in my opinion, a lot better than an tag. The command is never used because it's not universal. would be useful, except that very often you want to make the "Mammal" option selectable, rather than just a header. Usually people want the option to view the category as well as the subcategories. Interesting article though, thanks for the info. Dugg.
- psyon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I take it your tags go filtered out :(
- mkwng, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15must...know...which...tags...you...find...useful...
- headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Not a very good web developer if you didn't realized your tags would be stripped out from your input. Also not a good web developer if you don't understand the importance of web semantics.
- WiskyDrinker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I can tell you're a web designer and not a web developer. Before you make a comment like that, you should please understand what you're talking about.
- noodlez, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5great article, but i've used them all except for the q tag.
but then again, i only knew about them because i did a full scan of the w3c specs.- kofspades, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16You must be fun at parties. :)
- noodlez, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4blockquote styles = chick magnet
- 009l0, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Very useful! Thanks.
- atownzhoriest, on 10/12/2007, -44/+1hae guyz im nu to ds i ws wonderin f ne 1 wntz to show me around?im a female z dea ne malez owt dea hu z keen?
- Scourge, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16Did a few cars hit you in the head on your trip to the spell check?
- alej744, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3are you serious?
- alej744, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I don't think spell check could catch half of those "mistakes".
I think it's just dumbass-chonga-speak. - frank3000, on 10/12/2007, -19/+3new rule on digg: no ***** allowed
//mod me down :) - kofspades, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3You see the button at the top off your screen. You know, the one that looks like an arrow pointing to the left. It's probably green. You see it? Yeah? Click on that and never look back. Thanks.
- Lifestory, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4oh my god.. i actually understood what you were saying..
- Phocion55, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Wow, you're right - never used these tags before. Great examples as well. good job. Digg++.
- rarkai, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1These are nice...but do they validate xhtml?
- kodeiko, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Of course.
- DCstewieG, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Why don't you check instead of asking?
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.seomoz.org%2Fblogdetail.php%3FID%3D1282
- kingace, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The tag could probably be used for quick and easy content boxes.
- kingace, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5The address tag, I mean. Digg cut it off.
- JSchwage, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10To be honest, I hadn't heard of any of these tags before. And that's saying a lot, seeing as I'm in the web design business.
dugg- christopher, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8"[...]And that's saying a lot, seeing as I'm in the web design business."
Well, unfortunately - and this is not aimed at you at all, JSchwage - that's not really saying that much. I am constantly surprised by the lack of knowledge and comfort with web related technologies I see in people in "the web design business." Unless they were entirely on the design side but then i would not expect them to need to know any of it.
- christopher, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8"[...]And that's saying a lot, seeing as I'm in the web design business."
- LucasVB, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Sweet, I knew of all of those mentioned in the article!
Here's a nice index of HTML elements. Be sure to take a look at all those you don't know: http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/index/elements.html
@kevinfoster: Yeah, the button tag is not used enough. You can make nice stylized buttons using it, but most people rely on lame javascript codes for this. It's a shame, since it's a very versatile tag- cyclomedia, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0wow, guess i must be the only person with a "reference" folder in my bookmarks menu that looks a bit like this:
w3c - css properties
w3c - css spec
w3c - dtds
w3c - html 4.01 specs
w3c - web accessibility guidelines
etc.
- cyclomedia, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0wow, guess i must be the only person with a "reference" folder in my bookmarks menu that looks a bit like this:
- Submerge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Some off these tags are pretty damn interesting, but I've known about field sets for awhile since I programmed them in Visual Basic and later found them available for web use as well. Great way to organize input fields.
- goodshape, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1I'd be inclined to just use a CSS class on a DIV for these sort of effects, I don't really see anything here that can't be done that way.
..except maybe the acronym tag; honestly didn't know about that one. Might just use it someday :)- strcmp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The point is that you can style these elements just as you could a DIV while retaining as much semantic information as possible.
- headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Semantics!
- iTorrey, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2What is semantic about the 'br' tag?
He says to use "address" because it's semantic and then he goes on to use "br" in the example for display purposes. Why not wrap each row in a span and set the display:block? That would at least provide some kind of semantic value - headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5"Why not wrap each row in a span and set the display:block? That would at least provide some kind of semantic value"
How is that semantic? The idea behind semantics is giving all the 1's & 0's on the web *meaning*. A span tag has no meaning, and says nothing about the information contained within.
An address tag on the other hand makes it very clear that the information contained within the tags is an *address* of some sort.
I think you're confused. - cyclomedia, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4the BR tag is legal for line breaks where line breaks are normally found, but not for layout (bumping things down the page) or paragraph breaks... Addresses and Haiku Poems, for example, both have line breaks as part of their structure, and so need BR tags
- tagnarth, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I love fieldset and legend. They make for a great way to group elements in a logical and visually appealing way.
I knew about all of them but the q one. A shame IE doesn't support it (yet?)
I've found optgroup to be a godsend for clients. Instead of creating two drop downs where one is groups and the other is their items. You just have one and the browser doesn't let you select the group name. - CaptShmo, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1digg, but i don't know if i see these lasting in later versions of browsers just because they are used so infrequently. i won't use them but i'm glad they exist.
- kodeiko, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3They are in the HTML specs so why wouldnt they be?
- sbgskl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4they've been used infrequently for all of the web's existence, yet browsers still handle them fine. why would developers choose to remove them later? there's no advantage, and definite disadvantage.
- Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -6/+35Dupe. These are all from http://www.w3.org
- webcrumb, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19One of the greatest dupe-calls I've heard. :D
- actionscripted, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3Does this mean if I post uncommon dictionary words I can get on the front page of Digg? Real web developers DO know about these tags. The fact that common people don't should not be Digg-worthy.
"Gee...I didn't know those existed! Digg++!"
I'm starting to loathe Digg's new userbase. - Markie1006, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Now I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure Urusal was being funny ;)
- DruidGwynneth, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@actionscripted: kindly go find one of those 'common people' and ask to borrow their sense of humor.
- bpapa, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3fieldset and legend are great.
as for the rest... well, address I'll say I hate, because you have to put br tags inside of it. it's a very semantic, great element, but the fact that you have to format it makes it pretty annoying to me. i hate br tags.- chadu, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1could you put a ul and li inside of it to break the lines?
- bpapa, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1ehhh i dunno. it might work but it seems weird to me.
one of the old browsers had prop. tags that went inside of address like "street", "zip", etc. I think that's more semantic. - headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2You don't have to use br tags. You can use list (as the person above me said), paragraph tags...
- bpapa, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2yeah but neither of those really make any sense. a street address isn't really a list item or a paragraph. neither really makes any sense semantically.
- headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"yeah but neither of those really make any sense. a street address isn't really a list item or a paragraph. neither really makes any sense semantically."
True. I would say using an <address> tag is a step in the right direction, but not semantic enough. - joeblade, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0You only have to put line breaks in it if you want each part of the address on a separate line - as the address element is just for 'contact information for this document', there's no reason why you can't have a single line of text with an email address inside.
The element isn't just meant for bricks-and-mortar, physical locations. - cyclomedia, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2what's with the BR hate around here? When you write an address on an envelope do you
a) write it all on one line, or
b) write it across several lines?
if your answer is b) then you are using the real-life (tm) version of a BR. a LI tag would be bad semantics, because a list denotes that each line is a seperate item from the others, whereas an address is a single block of information. paragraph breaks would also be bad for similar reasons.
- jerr0328, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4It's funny to look at the implementation in firefox and then in IE. Firefox renders everything correctly, while IE makes it seem like crap.
But I'm definitely using these tags for my web applications. The W3C documents are often difficult to understand and tiring to look through, but this shows everything with a good explanation and a cool CSS example, with a neat implementation. - Vyx36, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Good list — though I wouldn't call the or tag underused.
And has anyone ever given the or tags any credit for semnatic use? How much more semnatic can you get? :) - n3r0, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2i'm not sure if i like the address tag, mabye if it had some attributes like "street", "city", "state", etc. it'd be better.
- DruidGwynneth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Not if you lived in Canada... or anywhere else outside the US for that matter. (Yes, I know that we originated the Internet, but the WWW was originated elsewhere, so we have to be nice.) And thanks for hitting the (should be blindingly obvious) nail on the semantic address coffin.
- joeblade, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Have a look at the hCard microformat (http://microformats.org/), it's a way of usefully including that information within your address.
- stygiansonic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Microformats (such as the mentioned hCard format) are a good way to add more semantics to the address element. Don't digg down the link to microformats.org; it's not spam but rather a good resource for anyone who's interested in semantics on the web. (All of the microformats are being developed by way of an open discussion)
- MikeKnoop, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3OPTGROUP eh? That is probably the most usefull in my opinion, I have seen so many drop down forms that include groupings, but allow you to select them. When you select them the javascript just reloads the page.
-Mike- Bradl3y, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I did not know about that either, I use css to make my groupings non-selectable and appear similarly to how they appear using that tag!
- popstalin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I've begun using these tags the more I learn about standards and accessibility and search engine optimization. One of my favorites is the acronym and/or abbreviation tag(s). As a web designer, I often forget when listing my abilities to prospective clients they usually have no clue what HTML, CSS or SEO stands for even though I do. Using the handy acronym tag coupled with the title tag and some CSS styling (which I assign the cursor:help definition to) people figure out that it's not a link at all but a definition of sorts explaining these weird letters.
I'm going to see if I can find ways to use the address tag in the future. - andrewthrice, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2These are pretty good, especially fieldset and legend, but I prefer to use microformats over address:
http://microformats.org/ - Ciebergasm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Nice article. I've heard of 3/5 of those from Elizabeth Castro's HTML and XHTML guide book, and the other two were quite a nice surprise. The author is right- I never use them, even if I know about them. I loved his example, thought, showed why I should be using them.
- inkubux, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Feildset and legend are used more then the other. I use them a lot to amagamate forms feilds together :)
Nice article - JoshHickman, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0DUDE!!!! I use in forums all the time. I find this helpful when I want someone to say something they didn't say, lol.
- headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Why is it that so many people commenting here, don't realize if you use a tag in your comment, it'll get stripped out?
<q>
Use entities please. - SniperSlap, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1GREAT article! I really enjoy his examples, he makes great use of very nice basic design skills to get the effectiveness across.
That being said...
I think the opportunity to use these has come and gone. Older browsers that may (or usually won't) recognize these tags don't support CSS and anything else well enough to sexify pages the way he did. The only benefit in the end is to ensure that the information is "well tagged". - bmson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Few others you should use.
dl, dt, dd
button
text- bmson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Well no html tag. I should have known :/
Hope this work
<dl>
<dt></dt>
<dd></dd>
</dl>
<button class="myClass">text</button> - sideral, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yeah! are among the less known, altough the _first_ webpage in internet used them! Also, there is another _very_ useful, but fairly used tag: It helps a lot with forms. Also don't forget and elements for tables. Not very used, but could be useful in certain situations.
- sideral, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1In my previous comment i was talking about <dd> , <dl> <dt> <label> and <colgroup>
- montanna, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0How about CAPTION for your tables?
http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/tables.html#h-11.2.2
- bmson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Well no html tag. I should have known :/
- schnitzi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15 <q> Note: Apparently this little gem doesn't work in IE.
That's fun. Now you can put things on your web pages like "IE is a <q>web browser<q/>" and IE users won't know you're actually making fun of them.- cleverboy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2LOL. Exactly. It busts my brain that someone would write an article that notes how cool a tag is, and not even try to test it on IE. Firefox users should check out the IE Tab extension. Makes quick testing easy without compromising your environment.
Also, I've found that people don't use the "LABEL" tag nearly enough with RADIO buttons. Using the "for" attribute and an id, you can click on the TEXT of the label to "select" a RADIO option... just like in normal GUI controls. It's dead useful, but even large websites don't seem to get it more than half the time.
OPTGROUP kicks ass. I never caught up with finding out how people went about doing that. But, now I know. Yo, Joe!
- cleverboy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2LOL. Exactly. It busts my brain that someone would write an article that notes how cool a tag is, and not even try to test it on IE. Firefox users should check out the IE Tab extension. Makes quick testing easy without compromising your environment.
- keitho, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1only the fieldset and legend tags are worth a crap. the others are trivial and pointless. I'd rather use divs and style it.
- bmson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5There is more to websites and html, than the layout.
You should your address for address strong for bold text and h1 for headlines, tables for table-content, p and span for text and div for template. - bpapa, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2why would you "rather" use divs?
- bmson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5There is more to websites and html, than the layout.
- Square1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Nice Article. I am constantly looking for new info on HTML and CSS. I particularly like the acronym and abbreviation tags, and have a feeling I will be implementing them in the future.
- AceTracer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0The only one I don't use is (doesn't work in IE) and I'll admit I've not heard of either of those.
I swear by and , I use them on a regular basis and it's a great way to add nifty effects to forms without much hassle. Few people have seen the effects a simple border around a legend creates, and it's done with only a line of code.
I would also add the many tags you can use with tables, like caption, summary, etc. People rarely use tables correctly, and even when they do they only use them to about 20% of their capacity. - thabenksta, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I guess I should have made mine a "Top X" list
http://digg.com/programming/The_Forgotten_HTML_Tags - poipoipoi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Can't wait til they implement the [make it look how i want] tag.
- xxpor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0too bad that if its not supported in IE, it wont be used.
- inkswamp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Nice. I almost always avoid these kinds of articles on Digg because they're usually too long and very much aimed at newbies, but this was short and surprisingly informative.
- lcarsdeveloper, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I've used OPTGROUP a few times, it can be very useful, especially if your alternative is indenting all your list options with '=' or '-'
Dogs
==Dog 1
==Dog 2
Cats
==Big Cats
====Big Cat 1
==Small Cats
====Small Cat 1
And I use FIELDSET/LEGEND a lot, it makes forms look much nicer. If you have complex forms, for the sake of user friendliness it's worthwhile to group each major section of your form using a FIELDSET/LEGEND. I've seen many sites where this gets ignored and the fields are just a long list down the page.
I don't have much use for Q and ADDRESS on my site, but I like the idea of using ACRONYM/ABBR more often.
Good list, thanks for posting :) - Jonsey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Very happy to find Optgroup... found a real use for it!
- shadowman99, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0digg
- ZephyrWest, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Fieldset and legend are nothing new for me... but the others are new. :)
-
Show 51 - 65 of 65 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by