Gervase Markham wrote:
[ snip ]
> What _benefits_ are there in using XHTML over HTML 4.01 Strict? I'm not
> going to post Henri's opinion here a third time, but I do agree with it -
> using XHTML without enforcing well-formedness at the browser is just
> asking for trouble.
>
> I remember reading, in a bug I think, that they had a big argument about
> this on the W3C list. I am pretty sure that the conclusion was XHTML as
> text/xml only, and HTML as text/html, but I'm not certain. dbaron (among
> others) would know.
Just spoke with dbaron. While he didn't go into detail, the essence was
that xhtml wasn't ready to serve mozilla.org. Quite what isn't ready
(the specs or the clients) we didn't go into, although hints were made.
Basically, it's a no-no in his opinion from what I could tell.
[ MPT: links and management systems ]
>> No, it doesn't. We need to minimize linkrot whether or not we use a
>> content management system. A content management system might make it
>> easy to keep links on our own site up to date, but it will do nothing to
>> update links to mozilla.org which reside on other people's Web sites and
>> bookmark lists.
Doesn't that rather depend on what the content management system
actually does?
[ on to navigational structure ]
> But the navigational structure won't be a tree. At least, I would have
> thought it wouldn't be - the problems we've had deciding where things live
> are symptoms of the fact that, navigationally, some things live in two or
> more places.
How does that help prevent linkrot? Whether it is primarily flat or
heirarchical in structure, links will still be present to anywhere else
in the site.
I don't think we can prevent linkrot entirely, simply because we cannot
predict the future. However if the structure is natural and linear
(/en/news/2001/01/10 is a good example imo, as is
/en/developer/building/unix or whatever) then hopefully rot will be
minimised.
>>> If it works on Nav 4.x on any platform, it should work on the others -
>>> right?
>>> ...
>>
>> No. 4.x versions for different platforms have different crasher bugs.
> But the rendering is basically the same? It's not like IE 5 for
> Mac/Windows. Right?
From what I have heard, even tables render differently in IE3/4/5. From
the conversation I had with Dawn Endico Sunday evening, I think she will
accept HTML 4.01 Strict with CSS providing Netscape 4.x gets a reduced
stylesheet that does not expose the layout bugs in it, or none at all.
I *think* I can get her to accept CSS onto the site providing Navigator
4.x across all platforms gets sent html/css that still renders the page
'prettily' even if it's quite basic. She really worried me when she
hinted that no css at all would be preferable... but I'll work on that
front :)
I am looking into Zope as a content management system... So far just
creating an initial website is proving a hassle (you need an add-on
'product' to provide for multiple sites). I'll stick at it, and try to
fit it in with my normal work schedules.
James
