Am Dienstag, den 22.03.2005, 20:59 +0100 schrieb Nicolas Vervelle: > From: "Daniel Leidert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > What about using PHP and not XML/XSL for this special problem? And BTW: > > Well, I don't know PHP, and don't know either if you can use PHP on > sourceforge websites.
Usage should be possible. To test it, create a file called phpinfo.php with content: <? phpinfo(); ?> Save and upload it and call it in your favourite browser. I will try to write a short function, which tests on the files available in the directory and then adds the necessary icons and messages. It should be not that problem. > I can learn, but I was looking for a quick way of doing this ;) > > > IMHO it's useless to use XML for the websites. The main part of these > > xml files is written in (X)HTML-like tags and you don't use the > > website-xml package (so you have to write a stylesheet for mainly > > HTML-like XML files). So I can't see any advantage of using XML. > > I'm not sure I understand correctly : XML is not used directy for the > website, XML files are just converted with XSL to HTML files during the > build process. Yes, I know. But I can't see any advantage at the moment. You have more work with writing XML-files and converting them to HTML with a self-written XSL stylesheet than e.g. directly writing HTML. The syntax used in the XML-files is mainly based on HTML. > It would mean some work to change the way the website is generated. That's true (of course). Personally I would like to see a solution, which also makes it easy to translate the sites. > > Further, the currently produced HTML code is not valid (I've tested some > > time ago, when I was thinking about a better way of translation). > > I changed a few things recently so that the HTML code is cleaner. > I'm not a specialist, but now most of the pages go through > http://www.htmlvalidator.com/lite/ without problem. > (it's the lite version of an HTML validator). You should use the W3C validator: http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.jmol.org There is no limitation, the service is free and provided my the W3C, the consortium who publishes the recommendations. > There are still existing > problems but they are not detailed by this tool. > If you can tell me what is still invalid HTML, I could correct it :) Have a look at the above site. If the produced code should be XHTML, then use http://schneegans.de/sv/ - the XHTML-validator from the W3C has some limitations, the validator from Christoph Schneegans should work properly. Regards, Daniel ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: 2005 Windows Mobile Application Contest Submit applications for Windows Mobile(tm)-based Pocket PCs or Smartphones for the chance to win $25,000 and application distribution. Enter today at http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6882&alloc_id=15148&op=click _______________________________________________ Jmol-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jmol-developers
