On 13 May 2008, at 01:36, Nikita The Spider The Spider wrote:
One big impediment to using XHTML 1.1 is that it must be sent with the
application/xhtml+xml media type which makes IE6 choke.
... and IE7 and IE8.
Adding support for XHTML hasn't been a priority for Microsoft
(presumably
If you do content negotiation to send html/text and XHTML 1.0 to IE and
application/xhtml+xml XHTML to anyone else then you're effectivly using
XHTML 1.0 html/text as you'd never be able to make use of the modular XML
nature of XHTML 1.1.
- Original Message -
From: Nikita The Spider
You can still do that with XHTML 1.0 sent as html/text. I've done that
several times when I've made desktop gadgets to extract data from my site.
The parsers doesn't care if the page is sent as html/text instead of
xml/text.
I don't see any point of using XHTML 1.1 unless you use it's modular
Hi Laert,
Try this
div id=flashcontent
strongYou need to upgrade your Flash Player/strong
This is replaced by the Flash content.
Place your alternate content here and users without the Flash
plugin or with
Javascript
nonsense!
You needn't use JS for this as it can be done without JS.
http://www.alistapart.com/articles/flashsatay/
Joe
On May 13, 2008, at 08:55, Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd wrote:
Hi Laert,
Try this
div id=flashcontent
strongYou need to upgrade your Flash
From: Laert Jansen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 22:58:03 -0300
Subject: Re: [WSG] Embed a flash file 100%
I´ve already set the height to 100%. The flash file is 778 x 560 px
I can´t find out why that white area is showing on the top.
If you make the height:100% then it is 100% of
Can someone who know Zeldman let him know that the domain is expired:
http://www.alistapart.com/
Cheers,
Francisco.
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe:
My brain isn't working. I thought I have the answer but it's not
working :-(
http://lotusseedsdesign.com/menu.html
start from the second menu, the hover goes off , but actually the
position for the hover state is correct. I do not understand why the
link's position-x got it wrong starts
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 11:55 AM, Francisco Antunes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Can someone who know Zeldman let him know that the domain is expired:
http://www.alistapart.com/
He's asleep at the moment. :)
Do Happy Cog 'run' Magnolia as well? That lapsed too, I seem to remember.
--
-
Matthew Pennell wrote:
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 11:55 AM, Francisco Antunes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Can someone who know Zeldman let him know that the domain is expired:
http://www.alistapart.com/
He's asleep at the moment. :)
Do Happy Cog 'run' Magnolia as well? That lapsed too, I seem to
Not from here it hasn't
whois results:
Domain Name: ALISTAPART.COM
Registrar: NETWORK SOLUTIONS, LLC.
Whois Server: whois.networksolutions.com
Referral URL: http://www.networksolutions.com
Name Server: NS1.PENDINGRENEWALDELETION.COM
Name Server: NS2.PENDINGRENEWALDELETION.COM
Status:
On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 10:57 PM, XStandard Vlad Alexander
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
HTH wrote:
...server has to do content negotiation in order to send
text/html with one doctype (HTML or XHTML 1.0) to IE users and
application/xhtml+xml/XHTML 1.1 to everyone else. That means
you're
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 9:45 PM, Joseph Ortenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not from here it hasn't
whois results:
Domain Name: ALISTAPART.COM
Registrar: NETWORK SOLUTIONS, LLC.
Whois Server: whois.networksolutions.com
Referral URL: http://www.networksolutions.com
Name Server:
tee wrote:
My brain isn't working. I thought I have the answer but it's not
working :-(
http://lotusseedsdesign.com/menu.html
Missing base-position...
#menu li a {background-position: left top;}
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
On 5 May 2008, at 19:04, Thierry Koblentz wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rick Lecoat
Sent: Monday, May 05, 2008 8:26 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] Definition lists for testimonials
Hi, I need to mark up a
the problem isn´t the color of that areais that that area shouldn´t
exist..I left it white on purpose just to show the area apart from
the rest...
On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 11:20 PM, Andrew Maben [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On May 12, 2008, at 9:58 PM, Laert Jansen wrote:
I can´t
how about using the blockquote cite attribute?
http://brainstormsandraves.com/articles/semantics/structure/
They mention using cite for a url (or email link) and title for the
details.
seems to be compliant to me...
On May 13, 2008, at 16:31, Rick Lecoat wrote:
On 5 May 2008, at
On 13 May 2008, at 17:56, Joseph Ortenzi wrote:
how about using the blockquote cite attribute?
http://brainstormsandraves.com/articles/semantics/structure/
They mention using cite for a url (or email link) and title for the
details.
seems to be compliant to me...
Hi Joseph;
Thanks
On 13 May 2008, at 11:39, jay wrote:
If you make the height:100% then it is 100% of the parent - since
your flash file does not stretch to the that height the background
shows which you have declared as white:
var so = new SWFObject(main.swf, main, 100%, 100%, 8,
#ff); --
You
On 13 May 2008, at 19:48, Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote:
Don't forget the cite element too. If a source isn't online you
wouldn't use the cite attribute, but the element will still help
with proper attribution.
Mike, you're bang on the money: I had indeed completely forgotten
about the
where is it and is it incorporated into firefox yet?
dwain
On 5/12/08, Dean Matthews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 12, 2008, at 11:13 PM, dwain wrote:
and if you are wanting valid css then css3 will throw up errors in the
w3c css validator.
Not if you use the CSS level 3 validator
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 3:17 PM, XStandard Vlad Alexander
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Nikita,
Are you talking about putting an HTML doctype on
XHTML 1.1-formatted code
Yes, but normally you would put XHTML 1.1 markup into an template written
for a different DOCTYPE as shown in this
On May 13, 2008, at 3:44 PM, dwain wrote:
where is it and is it incorporated into firefox yet?
dwain
On 5/12/08, Dean Matthews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 12, 2008, at 11:13 PM, dwain wrote:
and if you are wanting valid css then css3 will throw up errors in
the
w3c css validator.
thanks for the info.
cheers,
dwain
On 5/13/08, Dean Matthews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 13, 2008, at 3:44 PM, dwain wrote:
where is it and is it incorporated into firefox yet?
dwain
On 5/12/08, Dean Matthews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 12, 2008, at 11:13 PM, dwain wrote:
Hi,
The use of large backgrounds has become more common given expanding
bandwidth. However standards are still a concern, what perils of
wisdom for using a full-page BG can the list cultivate?
Chris
***
List Guidelines:
From time to time over the past several years I have served web pages as XHTML
1.0 with content (MIME) type text/html to IE Browsers and with content (MIME)
type application/xhtml+xml to Browsers that recognize that content type -- via
Content Negotiation.
My current Home Page --
Nikita wrote:
the example you provided isn't valid XHTML.
I think you may have misunderstood. The example in this screen shot:
http://xstandard.com/94E7EECB-E7CF-4122-A6AF-8F817AA53C78/html-layout-xhtml-content.gif
.. shows how to embed XHTML 1.1 content into an HTML 4.01 Transitional page
Hi Chris,
bandwidth. However standards are still a concern, what perils of wisdom
for using a full-page BG can the list cultivate?
Hard on those with a slow connection, but I cannot foresee another issue
unless the background is a big animated GIF ;-)
You can offer a removal tool for
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 10:02 PM, XStandard Vlad Alexander
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nikita wrote:
the META tag would have to end in a / and then it
wouldn't be valid HTML anymore.
Sure it would. It may not be in the spec but it's a de facto standard.
Even the W3C validator will accept
On May 13, 2008, at 7:39 AM, Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:
tee wrote:
My brain isn't working. I thought I have the answer but it's not
working :-(
http://lotusseedsdesign.com/menu.html
Missing base-position...
#menu li a {background-position: left top;}
Georg
Georg, thanks for the
The W3C has an example of the use of the cite and quote elements here:
http://www.w3.org/People/mimasa/test/xhtml2/spec-examples/mod-text/cite-ex01.xhtml
Or you can read all about quotations here:
http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/text.html#h-9.2.2
You could avoid the blockquote and use a
Nikita wrote:
I encourage you to try that with the W3C validator. You will
not get the result you expect.
Comes back as valid HTML, as I expected. The validator did flag / as
warnings which it did not a few years back when the example was originally
created. But W3C's validator warning
On Tue, 13 May 2008 22:11:29 -0400, Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote:
Hi Chris,
bandwidth. However standards are still a concern, what perils of wisdom for
using a
full-page BG can the list cultivate?
Hard on those with a slow connection, but I cannot foresee another issue
unless the
33 matches
Mail list logo
