The guy who wrotes the article is right in the first part. But the conclusio and his recommendations are – from my point of view – wrong.
First:
- From my point of view three different levels are enough for tag clouds – For three levels the weightings: normal, emphased, strong are prefect from the semantic perspective – Using css classes to mark the importance is bad – even if their names are semantic because without css all levels are the same
So ask yourself: Do your really need more than 3 levels for something boring like a tag cloud? If yes, you have to deal with classes or ugly nested tag combinations to get something which is closest possible to semnatic stuff.
In all other situations you might prefer a true semantic solution based on an ordered list and the three levels normal, emphased, strong.
John Smith
The guy who wrotes the article is right in the first part. But the conclusio and his recommendations are – from my point of view – wrong.
First:
- From my point of view three different levels are enough for tag clouds – For three levels the weightings: normal, emphased, strong are prefect from the semantic perspective – Using css classes to mark the importance is bad – even if their names are semantic because without css all levels are the same
So ask yourself: Do your really need more than 3 levels for something boring like a tag cloud? If yes, you have to deal with classes or ugly nested tag combinations to get something which is closest possible to semnatic stuff.
In all other situations you might prefer a true semantic solution based on an ordered list and the three levels normal, emphased, strong.
Have a nice day.
John