Alessandro, Alessandro Radaelli wrote: > As agreed we worked on W3C validation of pmapper and we are rady to > provide the code related to XHTML 1.0 Strict and CSS2 validation (if you > don?t consider hacks for opacity)*.* Following you can find some > technical remarks; we could also provide a more detailed document with > the list of modified files, the meaning of every code change etcetera. > It is in italian language, if you are interested we could translate it > into English (unless you understand Italian language?. )
Yes, a detailed list would definitely help. I would regard my Italian as being 'acceptable', so I should be able to understand it without translations. For real contributions of code, like some new function or classes or modules, the comments in the code should be in English, otherwise it could become a strange mix of languages. > > How can I provide the code? There is a cvs, ftp space or something like > that? It is less than 1Mb. > the easiest would be to send me the code zipped as mail attachment and I will put it for download to the pmapper.net/dl site for people directly interested in it. If there are minor changes I can incorporate them probably quite fast, otherwise it might take some time. > > We did not made modifications related to ?table? tag substitution with > div?s (it is more an accessibility than not a validation issue, have a > great impact on code, especially for legend management and as far as I > understand from your e-mail you are not interested in this kind of > modifications.. ); we are discussing on the better way to handle this > issue. Could we develop it as another kind of legend? Could we assume > the interface between legend and other pmapper parts to be stable? > The whole part with legend/TOC was newly written not so long ago because the old one using 2 different approaches for tree/flat etc became difficult to manage. To make my life easier I put it into a mix of <table> and <div>. If you find a way to improve this just using DIV's it would be fine for me, provided it supports all the new configurations and works at least in IE, Firefox (and, more or less, in Opera). Otherwise, I by myself have no plans to modify that part again. > > We are trying to figure out a ?fluid layout?; as you said, it?s not an > easy task, especially if we want to have it implemented in a general way > or following a pre-existent ?absolute? layout. So, we are thinking to > develop a new layout (probably with horizontal buttons and some other > changes, to simplify the problem), to submit it to you and the mailing > list users, have your feedback and take further decisions > I already mentioned sometimes that the current way how the layout is done was a sort of compromise. I can live with it, without thinking it's a flexible and solid solution. > > Best regards > > Alessandro > Thanks for the efforts. When I will start to work on the 'code ingestion' I will probably contact you off-list for details. Ciao, Armin
