Florian Zeitz wrote:
dolphinling schrieb:
Lourens Veen wrote:
So, comment, complain, rant, flame, suggest, and I'll try and
incorporate as much as possible. I'm not entirely happy with the looks
of the Projects list for example, so that'll probably be tweaked a bit
anyway, but I'm open to suggestions on anything.
Oh, good, I'm not a hardware person either, and this is what I'm good
at. :-)
First off, ditch the XHTML, and go with HTML 4.01 strict. You're sending
it as text/html, so the XHTML doctype has no advantages.
Yes besides XHTML being what is currently recommend and being much saner
syntax wise, because it really sticks to XML syntax and has no wired
corner cases where you need no closing tags, etc. You also don't have
disadvatages using XHTML so I'd say keep it.
Recommended by who? Not me. ;) (and increasingly more standards
advocates, too.)
Really, though, I just wanted to throw it out on the table. In the end I
think it'll be dictated by whatever tools are being used to generate
parts of the site. And as long as it's valid and conformant and
semantic, either way will work all right.
In the News section, get rid of the <a name="">s, and use ids instead.
Also, wrap each post in a <div class="newspost">. And get rid of the
<hr>s, and instead use .newspost h2{border-bottom:2px grove #4189ff;} or
something like that.
The only reason for not using name attribute is that it will be replaced
with id in XHTML 2.0 (which is a good reason IMO), but not using it
makes no sense if you really want to use HTML 4.01, could you please
tell me why you want to move forward and backward at the same time?
I totally agree that this hr-tag is definitely a layout thing and should
be replaced with CSS.
id is perfectly valid HTML, and is considered best practice. <a
name="">, while valid, is not considered best practice.
And finally, get rid of the images directory. Put images in the folder
with the files they belong with, or if it belongs with many files, put
it in the deepest common folder.
It is perfectly sane IMO to put them in a images sub-directory of the
files they belong to or a images sub-directory of the deepest common
folder, because that allows better sepperation of code and binary (I
would also want to have a files sub-directory for downloads)
It breaks URL hierarchy structure, which is more important than
"separation of code and binary", since URL structure is user-facing.
--
dolphinling
<http://dolphinling.net/>
_______________________________________________
Open-graphics mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics
List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
