[WSG] [WSG Announce] Some links for light reading (22/12/09)
Will HTML5 make the Web even more invalid? http://rebuildingtheweb.com/en/html5-make-web-more-invalid/ Can you provide any reason why you keep posting links to this site? Yes the blog _seems_ to be about web standards, but the posts are just speculation of poor quality and based on the lack of information, misunderstanding and false assumptions. Sure, the guy has financial interest of keeping xhtml afloat, so he may see the HTML5 as a threat, but that's not a good enough reason to spout nonsense. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] [WSG Announce] Some links for light reading (22/12/09)
It obviously worked in provoking discussion. Where do you see discussion there? Does keep them coming count as one? I am all for them coming but I'd like some QA applied to them too. (And I reserve the right to keep my opinion about the original commenter to myself ;-) Don't be shy. I will stick to my right (I hope I have one) to call BS when I see it. Just as I did five years ago when Vlad was pushing similar FUD about HTML on this same list. Now seems like he has a new target. Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people. - Eleanor Roosevelt I was discussing the quality of the posts on rebuildingtheweb.com. I still think that this groups deserves better than writings of the guy who calls end tags elements and thinks that missing end tags for html and body elements in HTML4 is invalid markup. Seems Russ and you opted to discuss me instead. Do you think that quote still applies? Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] [WSG Announce] Some links for light reading (22/12/09)
I reckon HTML5 Nazis I thought I was being rude there… should chill our regarding the XHTML debates as HTML5 and XHTML are interchangeable terms. How so? HTML5 has XML serialization, but that does not make HTML5 and XHTML interchangeable in any way. Comments like this other guy made just add unnecessary negativity to the whole thing. So no matter how wrong someone is nobody can say that without being unnecessary negative? Russ is a legend in his own right and no one should even attempt to cyber bully him. ;-) Asking for a basic QA when choosing links for light reading counts as cyber bullying? This place gets stranger and stranger… Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] [WSG Announce] Some links for light reading (22/12/09)
Guys, Shouldn't this be a separate thread? Maybe there shouldn't be any thread in the first place. On the other hand, my complaint was about Some links. Anyhow, I won't bother you anymore. My apologies to anyone offended. Have a great holidays and less Out of office replies next year. Best wishes, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [Spam] :Re: [WSG] a table layout issue
I am ready to tell client technically this can't be done but this issue really struck me as it didn't occur to me a layout that simple can't be done with a table. Now it's more a personal quest than fulfilling client's requirement. http://rimantas.com/bits/table/ Of course you may need to replace some advanced selectors with classes for some lesser browsers. I've tested with Safari 4, Firefox 3.5 and Opera 10 on OS X only. I do not claim this is the best way to do this, but it is one of the possible ways to go. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] A Standards Oxymoron
Hi, After peeping the following requirement in a job description, looking for a Web Developer who can translate visual designs into pixel-perfect, standards-compliant html/css pages a grin rivaling a James Bond villain curled the corners of my mouth. Pixel perfect and standards is an oxymoron, complete opposed by goals and the nature of the web. No, it is not. The requirement itself may be not reasonable but it does not contradict web standards in any way. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] A Standards Oxymoron
Hi, I've sided with the following camps regarding the notion of pixel perfect designs and standards, so my interpretation of the job requirement left me amused by the juxtaposition. http://www.alistapart.com/articles/csstalking/ . And once we get over pixel perfect layouts (as a recovering pixel-nazi, I know it is really, REALLY hard) our designs should look lovely in any newer browser. http://www.message.uk.com/index.php?page=31 Why websites look different in different browsers (or why pixel-perfect design is not possible on the web) http://www.motive.co.nz/glossary/pixel.php I still fail to see how this leads to Pixel perfect and standards is an oxymoron, complete opposed by goals and the nature of the web. Let me quote http://acid3.acidtests.org/ To pass the test, a browser must use its default settings, the animation has to be smooth, the score has to end on 100/100, and the final page has to look exactly, PIXEL FOR PIXEL, like this reference rendering. (caps are mine). Toughest test to test standards compliance calling for pixel perfect match hardly makes pixel perfection and web standards an oxymoron. Though let me repeat: in most cases this requirement does not make any sense. On the other hand, it is not that hard to achieve as some may claim. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] Back to basics!
So you are really saying that typing I have got £100 to spare is OK, instead of: #8220;I have got pound;100 to spare#8221; (just as an example, of course). Really? Yes, really. HTML as SGML application has so called document character set, which is UCS (Universal Character Set,ISO10646). You can think of it as a huge (tens of thousands) list of characters where each character is identified by an integer number, so called code point. This list is identical to that of Unicode so if you pick any character in Unicode and then look up the character with the same code poin in UCS they will be identical. Document character set should not be confused with your html file encoding, which for historical reasons is specified using charset attribute. Basically encoding tells how to convert bytes in your document into characters. Let's say your have a byte with numerical value 200 (C8 in hex) in your document. If your document has encoding ISO885-5 that maps into cyrillic letter Ш. If your document's encoding is ISO5589-13 that will be the letter Č. Browsers are supposed to map known encodings to document character set, where Ш is code point 1064 (0x0428) and Č is code point 268 (0x010C). Let's suppose that for some reason you want to have Ш in your ISO8859-13 encoded document. You cannot type it in directly, because this character is not in your specified character set. Character entities to rescue—they let you specify character from *HTML document character set, UCS*. This is important and some mistakenly think that character entities map to the current encoding (I think some old browsers did indeed do that, but that's a bug). So #200; won't give you Č in ISO8859-13 and won't give you Ш in ISO8859-5: in both cases you will get character which has code point 200 in unicode/ucs—È. So that's where character entities are useful—you can display UCS characters which are not available in your charset. If you are using unicode encoding there is not need for that, just type the character. For more info see: http://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-what-is-encoding http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/charset.html Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] font size - was [ Accessible websites]
I've been reading (and trying to learn from) the discussions on accessibility and particularly font size. I have never had any success at using ways other than pixels. … So, whilst the idea of text at 100% sounds reasonable, I always get a mixed bag of results. I feel as a designer(suggester), that I cannot possibly allow something I've done to look laughably clumsy in some browsers. Contrary to the idea that users want to choose there own settings, my experience is that very very few even know they can do it, let alone want to be bothered! Is there a way around this, which provides a more consistent interface AND maintains user choice for those who want it? Idea about respecting users' choice is plain bullshit, this kind of meaningless discussions were going there for six years or so, and they lead to nowhere. Best way is to ignore them. And him. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] utf8 character display problem
Here's the issue: We are working on a site that incorporates Russian text. It displays OK on our development server, but when transferring the files to the live server we get garbled output. … However, the same file uploaded to the live server displays the last menu item incorrectly: http://www.imperial-russian-dating.com/utf8-test.php The file has been saved as utf8 encoded in the editor (Komodo) and then uploaded to each server. Any ideas ? There are headers sent by your live server: Connection:close Content-Length:862 Content-Type:text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Date:Tue, 07 Jul 2009 16:22:43 GMT Server:Apache/2.2.3 (CentOS) X-Powered-By:PHP/5.1.6 Take a look at Content-Type header: it specifies charset as iso-8859-1. Charset specified in HTTP has preference over charset in META. If you have access to your server configuration look for AddDefaultCharset directive in Apache config. You can either change it to UTF or comment it out. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] website fonts
Oh, it doesn't stop with fonts! Some website producers are arrogant enough to force text and images on the visitor instead of allowing them to enjoy the default text and images they have written for their own browser. It's shocking; simply shocking. If people actually wanted to read the text, see the images, and enjoy the graphic and typographic design of other people (give me a break!), they would have connected these computers into a world-wide network and permitted us to browse around looking at one another's... hey... wait a minute... hmm, let me rethink this one. Paul, thanks for this one, made my day! Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] The weirdest IE bug I've ever encountered.
Then perhaps you would care to explain why this document: http://zenpsycho.com/quirkstest2.htm activates standards mode, when the table you've linked to suggests that it should be in quirks mode? Table clearly shows, that this page should activate standards mode. It is the last line, „unrecognized doctype“. I would conclude that the page you've linked to does not reflect reality. What would you conclude? I conclude, that HTML (No Version Present) means doctype like this: !DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML//EN and !DOCTYPE html falls under unrecognized !DOCTYPE (and is actually the only reason why html5 has doctype at all: because unrecognized doctype triggers standards compatible mode in IE), hence the table is accurate. Test with the versionless doctype I gave above and see. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] The weirdest IE bug I've ever encountered.
I'm pretty sure the well observed and documented behavior of IE is that WHICH doctype makes absolutely not a lick of difference at all. This is not correct. The only thing it looks for is the string !doctype at the beginning of the document, which decides whether it goes into quirksmode or not. Rendering mode does depend on the doctype: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb250395.aspx#cssenhancements_topic2 ... Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] Box model in IE7
Personally, I think there should have been a companion article
explaining why designers can't write code.
That would be the very wrong article.
This is a classic example: the whole point of setting the base font size
to this value is to make the maths easier when sizing all other font
rules; but that itself exposes the fact that the designer is still
basically designing with Pixel sizes!
And there is NOTHING wrong with pixel sizes. Some myths
just never die.
Under those circumstances, I would tend to encourage the use of sizes in
percentages, after a global reset to 100%.
But then, I am a developer, and think that Design Types shouldn't be
allowed anywhere near an angle bracket - for their own good: they are
too sharp for the un-trained hand.
So you say Dave Shea, Dan Cederholm, Douglas Bowman, Dunstan Orchard
and other should not be allowed to write code? What a pity, they could teach
a thing or two 99.999% of developer types out there.
And yes, I am a developer.
Regards,
Rimantas
--
http://rimantas.com/
Mike
-Original Message-
From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org]
On Behalf Of CK
Sent: 24 April 2009 00:57
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Box model in IE7
Hi,
Would you elaborate on why the CSS rule invalidates the article? As it
appears the authors explanation is sound.
html {
font-size: 62.5%;
}
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***
Re: [WSG] Box model in IE7
Getting back on subject, I do not think the box model has been fixed in IE7, but I do not know for sure. You might try adding margin for separation with containing div tags in browsers. Once again: box model was fixed in IE6, given your page has proper doctype (and nothing above it). http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb250395.aspx#cssenhancements_topic3 Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] Box model in IE7
Is the box model in IE7 still messed up? I thought they sorted it? Box model was fixed in IE6 (with apropriate doctype). I am floating a div to the right with a width of 50%. The div to the left has a right margin of 50%. I've put a 1px solid border on both of them. In IE7 there is a gap between them but in Firefox they are right against each other. Go figure? May be some rounding issues. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] Re: Users who deliberately disable JavaScript
What kind of mobile phone does the average person use? … As for that figure, I'm not sure that includes browsers that don't actually support javascript at all! … The right question to ask would be what kind of mobile phone does the average person use to browse the web?. My point is, that those owning devices with not so great browsers avoid browsing the web, on the other hand iPhone or Android phones make it straight-forward and pleasant experience. The end result would be that despite being insignificant number in terms of mobile unit count these devices will be much more prominent on the web. See for example here: http://blogs.computerworld.com/iphone_users_search_google_5000 or here: http://www.comscore.com/press/release.asp?press=2321 Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] Re: Users who deliberately disable JavaScript
IMO stats from tech sites are not very representative of the general intarwebs user base. Exactly, only this can mean the opposite of what you state: more tech savy users know how to turn Javascript off, unlike the general public. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] Re: Users who deliberately disable JavaScript
Another point to note is that many mobile phones have JavaScript enabled so this figure may increase with the expected rise in mobile popularity. *** Sorry - that should have said disabled not enabled ** I actually see mobile browsing rising in popularity when browsers on gadgets are full capable—like mobile safari, or android's browser, so I don't expect to see the number of JS enabled users decreasing because of mobile devices. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] Helpful Criticism and Browser test plz
Just got my latest project to validate XHTML Strict, and just wanted any
helpful criticism and also to see if any problems with any Browsers and
Operating Systems .
http://www.clock-this.co.uk/
Pro:
Looks nice
Cons:
- increasing text size messes thing up (at least in Safari/Mac)
- Inline styles (style=…) – bad idea. CSS is about seperation
content and presentation, so inline styles should be avoided.
- This is really bad:
divp/br/br/br/br/br/br/br/br/br/br/br/br/br/br/br/br/br/br/br/br/br/br/br/img
src=img/quote2.jpg alt=//div.
Decorative images shouldn't be in you XHTML code, they belong in
CSS. Also, use CSS to position them.
- This is especially bad: div
onmouseover=this.style.background='transparent';
this.style.color='#93278e';
onmouseout=this.style.background='transparent';
this.style.color='#606060'; class=txtnavbaritem style=left: 11px;
top: 11px; width: 109px; height: 18px; background: transparent;
font-family: Microsoft Sans Serif; font-size: 11px; color: #606060;
opacity: 1.00; filter: alpha(opacity=100);
text-decoration:none;padding-left: 10px; font-weight:bold;a
style=text-decoration:none
href=http://www.clock-this.co.uk/tick-talk.php;Tick Talk/a/div
Jus use CSS for effect: define how your links look with a:link {…},
and then define how they look while mouse is over them with a:hover
{…} That way you will avoid needles
code repetition, unnecessary Javascript and inline styles, code will
be much more compact and easier to read/maintain.
I think this will do for starters, did not dig deeper.
Regards,
Rimantas
--
http://rimantas.com/
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***
Re: [WSG] JavaScript and Accessibility
Without using alerts, you could add the warning into the actual document. But how does a screen reader know the document has changed? For starters: http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/introduction-to-wai-aria/ Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] HTML/XHTML/XML - Question about the future of.
FWIW - You can use the HTML 5 DOCTYPE today. Browsers only use the DOCTYPE for standards / quirks mode switching, and all browsers switch to strict with this, I believe: !DOCTYPE html The validator still needs a DTD though. There is a validator for HTML5: http://html5.validator.nu/ Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] HTML/XHTML/XML - Question about the future of.
... I say that in the years coming, maybe 20 years from now, who knows, but eventually HTML and XHTML will be replaced by XML. XHTML _is_ XML The other two say differently, more along the lines that they will never do away with HTML or XHTML. Even if HTML will be replaced by something it won't be XML. And I am pretty sure we will still have plenty of HTML around. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] HTML/XHTML/XML - Question about the future of.
I made the same decision. I still follow HTML and XHTML, but anything I do (and have a choice about) is always HTML 4.01 Strict. I think it makes more sense than XHTML 1.0 Strict at this point since we can't really use real XHTML yet. It seems to defeat the purpose if you are using a Strict DTD incorrectly. Same here and looking forward to start using HTML5, at least for the personal projects first. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Who are the Away on leave Notices from? [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
but the point of IT is to make life easier. So it is the responsibility of the OOON setter to make heir OOON not mailstorm their lists and add more email to the already massive amount mail servers have to deal with. No to mention, this discussion would then be filtered out, so you wouldn't have been able to participate in this discussion. I believe in stopping the waste at source (conservation) over trying to fix it further down the line (recycling) as it is less work and a lighter load that way. That is all true, however… there will always be someone who forgets/does not know how to set up ooon properly - and no policies will save from that, so the only effective way to get rid of this kind of messages is to configure the mailing list software to take care of it. Of all the lists I am subscribed to WSG is the only one where these messages get through. I guess there are valid reasons why this is this way, but if it is fixable on ML side that would be a welcome change indeed. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Who are the Away on leave Notices from? [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
wondering what part of THREAD CLOSED people don't understand... I have always had trouble understanding messages that I do not see. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] JavaScript clarification please
... As others have said, most other OO languages implement class-based inheritance, often as a result of their linear underpinnings. People who are used to this approach, then go through some horrible kludges to simulate this unnecessarily in JavaScript apps, and then complain that the results are horrible. Prototype-based inheritance is a very different beast, and one that is much better suited to the way that JavaScript is supposed to be used. ... And thereby I suggest some related reading: http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2008/10/universal-design-pattern.html Enjoy! Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] JavaScript clarification please
I don't think Javascript is Object-Based, because I can just write a function that prints instead of using an object. And even though Javascript has objects, I think the style of writing it is more accurately described by the prototype model. You can print Hello, world in Ruby without explicitly creating any objects, does that also make it not Object-Based? And yes, even primitives and nil are object in Ruby (are primitives truly objects in Java, or can they be wrapped into objects?). Prototype is just one of the possible inheritance models. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera not playing nice with checkbox
By the way, the radio buttons on the above page, is exactly what I wrote about annoying thing about Opera that it inherits the borders from input element. Checkbox _is_ an input element. Just like radio – they are all INPUTs only with different type. If you want to target some type specifically you can use attribute selector in CSS - but that won't work for older IEs. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Figures out issues. Standards for troubleshooting css
My first steps are of course make sure things validate. Beyond that I don't have any standard steps besides really using google. Any good lists of generic steps people do when troubleshooting CSS issues. One URL: http://getfirebug.com/ Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Multiple Firefox on Mac
Does anyone have a link to a decent reference on running Firefox 2 3 simultaneously on Mac? I can't seem to find a decent one out there. It is very easy, see here for the ideas: http://ejohn.org/blog/sexy-firefox-3/ Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] iphone should not be part of your url
let's not forget that the iPhone's browser is (as of right now) the largest mobile browser, Not true. Opera Mini has more active users per week than iPhones that exist on the market. http://blogs.computerworld.com/iphone_users_search_google_5000 : The Financial Times talked to Google at the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona and found some interesting figures. iPhone users do an average of 50 times more Google searches than their nearest competitor. http://localmobilesearch.net/?p=513 : Roughly 85% of iPhone users access news and information and 59% search on their devices. That compares with 13% and 6% in the broader market. ... Again not true. Take the HTC Touch Diamond. It has both a superior screen resolution, and similar hardware specs, and a full HTML browser (Opera Mobile 9.5) with arguably greater standards compliance. Cannot tell about the mobile versions, but from what I see going on with Webkit it is ahead of all other engines. And unlike Mini it has a full JavaScript implementation. And let's see what's going on with JavaScript on iPhone: http://daringfireball.net/2008/07/webkit_performance_iphone Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Conflict between Mime Type and Document Type
Why sniff out browsers that accept XML? If the document is marked as XHTML 1.1 it should allways be sent as XML. ... That is true, but Internet Explorer does not support XHTML. HTML 4.01/5 ftw :) Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Conflict between Mime Type and Document Type
... FWIW - and I do not wish to reopen the considered harmful debate - appendix C allows for sending XHTML 1.1 as well as XHTML 1.0 as text/html. (That's a recent change in the specs that few seem to know about.) Can you elaborate what appendix C are you talking about? http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-media-types/xhtml-media-types.html#summary (latest version, supposedly) does not confirm this. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Float-less layouts
When using DIV, what translate that hierarchy? div id=level1 div id=level2 div id=level3I am down the hierarchy :(/div /div /div This may not make Lists better for construct, but it should show that the div element represents nothing at all (as it says in one of the 2 links you posted). I thought DIV represents division, some structural group, some _generic_ container. Because if we are talking hierarchy and semantics, I think something should reveal the relationship between these elements. something — like being in the same DIV? In the above example, what are the 2 DIVs used as wrappers (instead of the OLs) if they are not just structural hacks? Since when using element for the purpose it was created is a hack? At least with the list construct the wrappers *are* semantic. And how many semantic wrappers/containers/whatever are you going to have in the standard? No matter the number there will always be need for the generic one — which DIV is. ... Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: A: [WSG] Target Lawsuit - Please Make Yourself Heard
Speaking only of businesses int he United States, no government entity should be telling a private business what it must do WHAT? with that one line you have just summarised all that is strange about America. Private business is above the law? They can do whatever they like? so it's okay if a private business murders people? what about paying taxes? the government tells them to do that, are you saying that a private business can decide not to pay tax? I think these were mentioned in the part of the post you did not include in your quote... Interesting quoting tactics. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Font sizing: top down or bottom up
That was, in part, why I started this thread; I felt (and still feel) that the notion of you MUST design for 100% of your users' default text size because that is their preferred text size was becoming a mantra. And that is only an assumption. Default font size was chosen by browser vendors, not users. Not many know they can change it. Even less who know do it. People sometimes repeated it dogmatically, without really thinking about it. Dogmatism worries me. It should. ... On the other hand people can have their windmills to fight against if they don't hurt others in process. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Standards and Blogs
... One question though: On your tutorial page, you appear to put some PHP code above the doctype in order to remove any instance of self-closing tags. Specifically: ... Does this not throw Explorer into quirks mode? I was under the impression that anything (other than whitespace, maybe) before the doctype had this effect. Is PHP code an exception to this rule? or am I way off base here? Yes, because to throw IE into quirks mode you have something in HTML before the doctype. PHP code is processed on the server and browser does not see it, only the output. So, if it does not output anything you will be fine. One should be careful, though and watch for newlines and whitespace. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] an inline element (inside a block element) sibling ofanother block element
I think I'd like to hear from someone really into this stuff - because I realized that my interpretation would outlaw this: div img /div and surely that must be okay, no? I am confused, what problem do you try to solve? Yes, according to specification and DTD as shown earlier it is ok to have inline, block, or mixed content in DIV. Semantics don't have much to do with it - as you may have valid reasons to wrap single word (or image, or link) in SPAN you may have valid reasons to wrap it in DIV - they are both generic containers. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] an inline element (inside a block element) sibling of another block element
div A line of plain text. pA paragraph./p Another line of text. /div Now a question, Is this actually valid?? I recently recieved some templates of another designer and this was scattered all throughout the pages. I went through and put p around them BUT is it valid??? Or is it a case of in Transitional DTD its ok but Strict DTD it is not?? Why not to check it? From HTML 4.01 Strict DTD: Let's see DIV: !ELEMENT DIV - - (%flow;)*-- generic language/style container -- Ok, now let's look up what is %flow: !ENTITY % flow %block; | %inline; Checking %inline: !ENTITY % inline #PCDATA | %fontstyle; | %phrase; | %special; | %formctrl; Just to make sure - %special: !ENTITY % special A | IMG | OBJECT | BR | SCRIPT | MAP | Q | SUB | SUP | SPAN | BDO Woohoo, A is here. Case closed. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Using target=_blank
I used to work for a web development company who designed a website for a large homebuilder. At the bottom of the home page, we had a link to our website, i.e. Site designed by ourCompany. We did not use target=_blank. When our homebuilder customer clicked on our link and found themselves in our website development website, and then exited our website with the X and found they were no longer in their website, they immediately told us to change that. I think it makes sense to ask customers first and foremost, who are they building website for: themselves or their customers. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Who's A Front End Developer?
... To sum things up, for me a front-end developer uses at least one of the following techniques: - (X)HTML - CSS - JavaScript (client side) - Flash (?) I think that even for front-end developer some level of the knowledge about web servers and HTTP is essential. And cross-browser development, of course. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: self-closing tags in HTML, was: [WSG] A CMS for POSH sites?
I still can't see where it says that in the spec, do you need to know the SGML spec as well? It seems strange that the closing slash is taken as the close, rather than the greater than sign, is that in the HTML spec somewhere? http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/sgml/sgmldecl.html FEATURES, SHORTTAG YES ... Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Absolute Positioning-A Naive Question (Maybe)
... I don't think the Baron reference is sufficient evidence for the assertion that using floats for layout is an abuse of them. On the contrary, I have seen several references in the last few years that stated floats *were* the preferred layout method by the W3C CSS working group. ... I am with Richard Czeiger on this one. CSS is for presentation, is there right method? Flotas are just more robust, IMHO, that's it. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Some studies about web standards usage (sites of Estonia and W3C members)
I have made some further studies on Estonian web sites. Compared to the survey done in August, the number of valid sites has grown almost 50%. Quite interesting, but one thing confuses me: no HTML 4.01 Strict? Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Font Sizes - Best practice
... I'll think you'll find them pretty unanimous in saying in essence don't mess with user defaults. Don't expect all the latter to practice what they preach though. ... Only these are browsers vendors defaults, not users. Can anyone point me to a study which shows: a) How many users do know that there exists a preference for a font size. b) How many of the do know how to use it and indeed do use it. c) How many have an idea what 'px' or 'pt' is, and have an idea how big is 16pt/px. Same goes for DPI settings. d) How many users prefer to play with settings instead of doing what they were going to do in the first place (getting info)? So far discussions on this topic are based only on our beliefs and assumptions (including mine). Usability is not about giving more means for control, it is about removing need for control. In my first car there was a handle which operated choke (thingy which lets to control the air intake of a carburetor and hence the richness of the fuel mixture.) That gave me more control, but not more usability. My new car does not have this - and yet it is more usable. My main task is to get from the point A to the point B, not to play with choke. So when I got that burden removed from me, I have more usable product. So, good design is about sensible defaults - too choose defaults in such a way that least possible people will feel a need to changes them. But yes, for those you should provide means to do just that. And once again there should be a reason that majority web pages go with font size about 12px. Coincidentally, 12-13px is my proffered font size... But that, of course, does not proof anything. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Font Sizes - Best practice
... Yes, we as developers can educate them, but when they see their competitor sites (and even big sites from the likes of IBM and co.) *all* setting a slightly smaller default font size, they expect the same on their site as well. A yes, but all those other sites are wrong and I do it the right way argument won't hold much weight in that situation, I'm afraid... And what if there is a reason for that (slightly smaller font size)? I prefer when font on monitor has roughly the same _angular_ size as font in books. And no, it is not 16px. So in this sense I do prefer smaller fonts. But, frankly, I am very tired of these assumption based discussions. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] content type etc
Gee Rimantas, Such enlightenment! Oh, well, OK. According to [1] XHTML1.1 should not be sent with MIME type of text/html. Some may argue that should not is not the same as must not and need to serve IE justifies the use of text/html MIME type for XHTML1.1, but I belong to XHTML as text/html is meaningless camp. In case of application/xhtml+xml MIME type meta element makes no sense at all, because it is not used for anything - neither for mime type (which is never used for, be it html or xhtml), nor for character encoding information [2]. HTTP headers and XML declaration are used for this purpose. As for omitting mime type from meta element and leaving only charset info... This might work only in text/html context, in which such omission makes no sense. On the other hand charset info is optional in Content-type HTTP header, not the content type part itself ;) And you were right that was Lachlan who wrote about Content-type headers and meta element, see [3]. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-media-types/ [2] http://www.mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/faq.html#xhtmldiff [2] http://lachy.id.au/log/2006/01/content-type Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] content type etc
Ah... nearly. meta element content-type declarations ARE used, just not when the page viewed is coming from a non-local filesystem/HTTP. So it's necessary in the sense that it enables people to save your page and for that page to be 'usable' in a more general sense (though browsers have a tendency to inject crap into saved pages: there's only so much you can do!) When file is saved and then loaded Mozilla determines which parser - html, o xml to use by file extension. So if you save xhtml file as .html/.htm and then load it, it will be parsed by html parser, and in this case META is taken into account. If file is saved as .xhtml, .xml or .xht it will be parsed with xml pareser and META is ignored. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Wish-list for 2006
4) All remaining browsers fully support XHTML 2.0 and CSS3 I'd trade this one for 4) anyone, who calls himself the 'web professional' learning to use HTML and CSS properly. Yep, its about HTML4/XHTML1 and CSS2.1... Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Best Web Standards thing I learnt in 2005.
2005/12/22, Jay Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED]: ... Still looking for a valid replacement to the IE CSS, display: inline-block; thing... What am I missing? display: inline-block is perfectly valid in CSS2.1 Is your problem that CSS validator defaults to CSS2 profile? You can change that selecting CSS2.1 for Profile in [2]. Sorry, if I misunderstood your statement. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visuren.html#propdef-display [2] http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator-uri Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] CSS Driven?
2005/12/15, Bob Schwartz [EMAIL PROTECTED]: ... If it can't be done, It can be done, and it has be done hundreds of times (in real world too): take a look at csszengarden.com, or sites featured in cssvault.com, stylegala.com, etc. I'd like to see a humble admission from the non-table people that maybe there is an instance in the real world where a table is not only OK, but probably THE solution so I can fell less unpure:-} about using a table to solve my problem. Seems like you are not looking for solution, but for simple encouragament to stick with tables. Ok, if the only solution you are going to accept is table, and marking up table in you HTML is easier than single background: rule in CSS--use the table. But yes, it is unpure and against the spirit and the letter of standards (I won't quote, it was done before). Five years ago we did not have much choice, but we do have now. I've mad mine, you've made yours. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] CSS Driven?
Given a choice of one table or hacks to do what one table already does, I'll stick with the one table. Only so called hacks go to the presentation layer (CSS file) and table stays in your HTML markup. If the current specs still have height issues for divs (which it seems they do), how can we be chastised for using a table to accomplish what can't be accomplished without resorting to javascript or hacks - it seems the lesser of the evils. There is one browser with issues, not the specs. And still - table for layout _is_ a hack. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] CSS Driven?
I'd rather have that single, easy to spot hack, which adds very little overhead, than multiple background images and extra divs coupled with hyroglyphics in my css file. Amen So, how are you going to style your single table? Either with CSS with all multiple background imageas and extra divs, or with even more sliced pieces of images peppered accross that simple table? Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] CSS Driven?
2005/12/13, Bob Schwartz [EMAIL PROTECTED]: There is one browser with issues, not the specs. Which browser can correctly render the following: ... http://rimantas.com/bits/notable.html Opera: since version 4. Gecko browsers: works with the oldest I have got: Mozilla Seamonkey 0.6 (2000-12-05) build. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] CSS Driven?
Display: table-cell is a great tool, but its practicality will not be meaningful for several years. While IE5 Mac is fairly irrelevant, IE5 and IE6 Windows have a long life remaining. It's a fun declaration to play with, but serious commercial designers would be ill-advised to depend on it at this point. This is all true, but: Me: There is one browser with issues, not the specs. Bob: Which browser can correctly render the following: Question was which browser can, not which cannot. ;) My point was: we should not blame CSS for shortcomings of the particular browser. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] CSS Driven?
2005/12/12, Al Sparber [EMAIL PROTECTED]: ... I guess your assertion hinges on how one interprets the word should. Perhaps I am English-challenged, but I always took should to have a suggestive or advisory connotation, while shall or must are obligatory :-) ... http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] *Why* doesn't Google validate? was New logo scheme was talking points for standards
... Updated valid page, based on the above: http://xomerang.com/testpages/google/validGoogle.html (1,953 bytes) Ok I took your version and got it to extreme: http://rimantas.com/bits/google/google1.html (1729 bytes). What I did: got rid of some optional tags, shortened name of CSS file to one letter ( one may save four more bytes by removing extension); got rid of redundant META element (that info belongs to server config), removed widht and height from IMG: there is now use in this case to have them. Still valid HTML strict: http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1uri=http%3A//rimantas.com/bits/google/google1.html I retained the one-line Javascript in the head, but all styles are in an external CSS file: http://xomerang.com/testpages/google/validGoogle.css (636 bytes) So even for a one-off request, with no cached CSS, the valid version is 2589 bytes - *still* lighter weight than the current invalid version. One gotcha here: even in cached stylesheet case there is some chat going between browser and server, and it usually amounts in the range between 0.5 and 1KB. (http://rimantas.com/bits/google/headers.txt) So, for small javascript and CSS it may be better to have them in html, in case every byte counts. There is version with embeded CSS (I did not try to optimaze styles, taken as-is): http://rimantas.com/bits/google/google.html Size is 2361 bytes, but about 600 bytes of traffic are saved by having one HTTP request less. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] *Why* doesn't Google validate? was New logo scheme was talking points for standards
... I'm wondering what led MSN to go with external files, and Yahoo with CSS in the header. MSN is obviously much more optomized than Yahoo (the yahoo markup is a mess), and I'm thinking MSN might have picked the right choice. Their CSS file is massive and probably covers all the internal pages, which makes it worth the extra cost of having an external file. That's very very good point. Indeed, by tidying up SERPs and using common CSS file Google would save much much more. Optimizing only google.com start page does not make much sense: if one uses search form then he will want results pages too. Results pages are also generated by request from search box in Firefox or Opera, from google powered search in other pages. So SERPs are to be targeted if someone is serious about saving bandwidth. And in terms of web standards MSN with valid and CSS-formated start and results pages is way ahead of Google... Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] *Why* doesn't Google validate? was New logo scheme was talking points for standards
... I thought about doing that, but decided I didn't have time. Interestingly, comparing the two pages in http://www.websiteoptimization.com/services/analyze/ shows the original is *slightly* lighter (but I bet you could beat that by removing more carriage returns, same as the original) ... You can also remove html,/html,head,/head,body,/body, ps and /lis and still be valid HTML4.01 strict. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] XML Declaration
2005/12/3, T. R. Valentine [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 03/12/05, Christian Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If your server is sending the MIME type text/html, then the META doesn't do anything. You need to change the MIME type being sent out in the headers, and that is done server side. Thanks for that explanation. But what about when simply opening the .html file in a browser, no server involved? Even there I do not see a difference in IE between the two forms. Why should you? application/xhtml+xml MIME type is not known to IE, so it uses text/html. You may want to check this: http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/networking/moniker/overview/appendix_a.asp Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] XHTML Issues
... I code in xhtml Strict and serve it as text/html. My code is future-proof, valid and well structured. If I code in HTML4, there is less need for writing properly structured documents. Too bad if quality of code depends on choice between HTML and XHTML. If at some point in the future browsers understand xhtml served as xthml, changing the way it's served is a relatively simple operation. Re-coding from HTML to xhtml (and unlearning bad coding habits) is not as simple. Yep, changing will be the changing the line in servers config. Not so simple for majority of happy XHTML coders will be to find out, why CSS stopped working (case sensativity), what had happened with bacgrounds (html vs. body issue), why JavaScript is not working anymore (document.write, *NS and !-- ..script here... //-- issues), why document does not show up at all, and browsers throw ugly error (unrecognized entities and other issues). Or do you claim, that all those things are showed and explained to the newbies? What I see is lowercase tags, quote attributes staff. XHTML is more dangerous because of the way how errors are treated and thus requires more knowledge. Coding something in XHTML does not make it automaticly better. Plus, I'm sure you've read Ian Hickson's Serving XHTML as text/html considered harmful article?! One man's view, based on an assumption that people will write xhtml tagsoup. Even if they do, they will find out soon enough. In a very painful way. And from what I've seen I can say his assumption is pretty correct. If IE7 team cannot tell application/xhtml+xml from application/xml+xhtml what can we expect from newbies? It is pretty easy to check, all we need is some online tool which, given an url can resend page's content with application/xhtml+xml. Then grab those XHTML pages and see what happens. In the case of IE and XHTML, there isn't even limited support for it, there's none at all. While technically correct, it is misleading, particularly for newbies, who might read it as don't code in xhtml - people with MSIE will not be able to view your site. It's not true if the page is served as text/html. What is the point to teach begginers The Bad Thing (tm). If they are unspoiled begginers, they can learn to code properly whaterver language is. And HTML4 serverd as text/html does not rely on any unimplimented features. ... I think it's important for beginners to learn correctly from the beginning. Exactly. Teach them properly structured xhtml 1.0 and serve it in a MIME type that the browsers people use can work with. Ready to reap the benefits of X(HT)ML later, when browsers support it. Benefits of XHTML, which are? And speaking of the future browsers and one man's view: http://annevankesteren.nl/2005/11/xhtml-advocates http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/200511/choosing_html_or_xhtml/ http://annevankesteren.nl/2005/11/draconian Regards, Rimantas -- http//rimantas.com/ (in XHTML - that's WP fault). ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] XHTML Issues
2005/12/2, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Rimantas Liubertas wrote: It is pretty easy to check, all we need is some online tool which, given an url can resend page's content with application/xhtml+xml. Then grab those XHTML pages and see what happens. Try Hixie's content-type proxy. http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/cgi/content-type-proxy/content-type-proxy Oh, thanks a lot, you saved me from some coding :) Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Newcomers and Web Standards (was editor)
... Lachlan, here is a classic example of a person new to Web Standards asking for a recommendation about which editor to use and instead you embroil this person in a debate over MIME types. Do you think this is a healthy environment for newcomers to learn about Web Standards? Why do you need to stir things up? You know, I have tested those flawed assumptions and they appear to be true. What definitely looks like false statement is: ...because only XHTML Strict and 1.1 guarantee the clean separation of data from formatting, making them the clear choice whenever availability of data is an important factor. (from http://xstandard.com/page.asp?p=A4372B00-8D7F-4166-977C-64E5C4E3708Es=E638AEB0-ADC1-448B-9CE5-FB8AAE1FE55B#feature-xhtml-note) I guess td align=left headers=th056EAE64 valign=top (same source) adds credibility to the claim. You know, in old bad HTML I can just drop align=left part, because that's default behaviour, and use vertical-align: top instead of valign=top. Marketing is marketing, but lie adds no credibility either. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Newcomers and Web Standards (was editor)
2005/12/2, XStandard Vlad Alexander [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
So Rimantas, you have written invalid XHTML, served it as XML and then blamed
XHTML
because your Web site broke.
Your assumption is wrong :)
If you had written invalid HTML 4 and some User Agents had
not parsed it correctly, would you blame HTML 4?
No. And I do not blame XHTML. I don't like the selling of XHTML
without explaining exactly those
perils Hixie talks about.
Wow, calling us liars because XHTML 1.1 has td align= valign=
constructs speaks volumes about your character.
I call you liars because of this:
...because only XHTML Strict and 1.1 guarantee the clean separation
of data from formatting, making them the clear choice whenever
availability of data is an important factor.
This is a lie, plain and simple.
As it happens, there is no other way to do arbitrary alignment in
XHTML 1.1 other than using
this construct without resorting to inline CSS, which is deprecated, or by
using constructs
that are no better like:
td class=left top
I'd put it another way: no other way to do arbitrary alignment in
XHTML 1.1 generated by WYSIWYG tool.
Because:
1. Content of td is aligned to the left by default. No align=left
is necessary.
Content of th is centered by default.
In your case you used align=center to center images in some columns.
This can be done in external CSS file with one rule td img
{display:block; margin:auto}
2. Content in td by default is centered vertically. In most cases we
want it to be aligned to
the top, so single rule tr {vertical-align: top} takes care of all
valign=top attributes.
And if want to pollute your markup with these attributes, why not to
put them on tr, not each td?
3. If you have some cells which use different layout from the rest,
that means you have something
special in them. And this means you can have some id or class with
semantic, not presentational name. WYSIWYG tools are not smart enough
for that, but this is not the problem of (X)HTML and CSS.
All that means I can recode the page I referred in last post with
HTML4, and will have less and cleaner code than your XHTML1.1.
Recoding whole Notes section with dl and getting rid of all those
decorative img
would save a bunch too.
So, only XHTML Strict and 1.1 guarantee the clean separation of data
from formatting???
Language does not matter, how you use it matters.
Regards,
Rimantas
--
http://rimantas.com/
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
Re: [WSG] firefox 1.5 is official
The Mac version of HTMLTidy doesn't work under 1.5, which actually prevents me from upgrading on my work machine, as I use this all the time as a handy shortcut for picking up validation errors (and puts this thread vaguely on-topic too). The PC version works, so I'll be upgrading my PC for sure. Version which I got from http://users.skynet.be/mgueury/mozilla/download.html worked on 1.5RC just fine. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Altering a Valid (X)HTML with DHTML = Is it still REAL LY valid?
2005/11/11, Wayne Douglas [EMAIL PROTECTED]: It's a tricky one How? If a tree falls in a wood and no-one hears it - does it still make a noise? Well, it is tricky one. It certainly makes some air waves, but can those waves be called noise until they hit someone's eardrums? ;) But digging deeper we find that noise is sound and sound is certain vibration, capable of being detected by human organs of hearing. So, kidding aside, invalid is invalid. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Character encoding mismatch
2005/11/10, Paul Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I am getting the following warning when I validate my pages: -- Character Encoding mismatch! The character encoding specified in the HTTP header (iso-8859-1) is different from the value in the meta element (utf-8). I will use the value from the HTTP header (iso-8859-1) for this validation. ... and so on. I thought this was the correct way to add special characters for XHTML, but what I am reading now seems to contradict this. This is the part of standards where I get a bit confused. Does anyone have any advice or know of some good articles where they explain this in simple terms?? The problem is not with your XHTML but with your server. Most likely you are running Apache with AddDefaultCharset in configuration. If you have access to httpd.conf you should just comment out this directive, or change it to utf-8. Regards, Rimantas ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] inline element directly on body
2005/10/23, russ - maxdesign [EMAIL PROTECTED]: ... Inline elements [1] and anonymous inline boxes [2] cannot be placed directly inside the body, form or blockquote elements when using a strict Doctype. They must be wrapped in a block level element. ... [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/visuren.html#q7 [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/visuren.html#anonymous ... I'd say to lookup information for what can go where one should look at the corresponding DTD, in this case: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/sgml/dtd.html which says: !ELEMENT BODY O O (%block;|SCRIPT)+ +(INS|DEL) -- document body -- (%block;|SCRIPT)+ +(INS|DEL) lists allowed elements. Plus sign at the end means that BODY must contain at least one block level or SCRIPT element. %block; entity expands to: !ENTITY % block P | %heading; | %list; | %preformatted; | DL | DIV | NOSCRIPT | BLOCKQUOTE | FORM | HR | TABLE | FIELDSET | ADDRESS %heading;: !ENTITY % heading H1|H2|H3|H4|H5|H6 %list;:!ENTITY % list UL | OL %preformatted; !ENTITY % preformatted PRE Add there INS and DEL which may occur (plus sign in front) and you have list what is allowed in BODY. More info about how to read DTD: http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/intro/sgmltut.html http://www.w3schools.com/dtd/default.asp http://www.alistapart.com/stories/readspec http://www.autisticcuckoo.net/archive.php?id=2005/05/01/art-of-reading-dtd Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] javascripts and standards
2005/10/16, Patrick H. Lauke [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Jad Madi wrote: I know there is a lot of tutorials out there, but I'm looking for a book, do you recommend any book about coding with Js without breaking standards? I'd go for Jeremy Keith's new DOM Scripting book http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1590595335/103-7301643-7270227 At @media I did ask Jeremy which book would he recommend - his or DHTML Utopia His advice was that later was for more advanced developers, and his was more introductionary. I own DHML Utopia..., highly recommended. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Placement of company logo
I would argue (without sounding too much like a marketeer or graphic designer) that a logo (particularly if it's not just just text in a specific typeface, but also includes swooshes, ticks, whatver) is more than just a visual representation of text, in the same way that a head and shoulders passport photo of a person is not just a visual representation of the person's name - and nobody would hopefully argue that my photo should be marked up as my name and then image replaced with the photo. It's part of the company's identity, and as such is content - to a certain extent anyway. Patrick Some illustration: http://decaffeinated.org/archives/2005/09/27/logo Please, don't kick me if this is too much off topic :) Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Placement of company logo
... however - I argue that the issue isn't so clear cut if we take into account (and are concerned about) user environments like screenreaders / text-only browsers: the logos then just become text and, perhaps, should be marked-up as such ... ... So shall we get rid of IMG element altogether? Company's name is text, logo is more. Sure it must degrade to the text in non visual environment, but it does not hurt to provide richer experience in not so limited browsers? Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Placement of company logo
... QED: Use image replacement for logos (over h1 heading) where possible! ... I'd say, where necessary... I gradually arrived at this: Logo is important visual/id/navigation element of the page, so I have it in the html as IMG. It is not header of any kind (imho, no need to argue), so it is not placed in H1, which is spared for more appropriate usage — i.e. main header of the page - About us, Products, etc. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/
Re: [WSG] Clearleft.com
... Part of the point of web standards in general is that the user and user agent have final control of the layout, not the designer. So if the page is too wide on a 21 inch monitor, why not reduce the window size? ... Two questions - then what are designers for? Maybe just throw the info and leave all the rest for the users to control? Paint it yourself style of web. And the second one: why do you assume users WANT control? I want to get info, not to fiddle with my browser's window size. To quotes Steve Krug (or his wife): If something is hard to use I just don't use it as much. Sure, web is not print, but our eyes are still the same, and the same rules apply (at least regarding line length). So if fixed width is absolute no-no, then there is a good compromise - elastic layout. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] divitis - a worthy goal?
2005/9/9, Christian Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED]: ... Thus, we want our markup to have as much information as possible, so that every block level element has a title, every object has its alternative content, every acronym has its definition, etc. ... No, I don't want to have as much information as possible, I only want relevant and necessary information. Ending up in wordletter char=tt/letterletter char=hi/letterletter char=ii/letterletter char=ss/letter/word does not impress me at all. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] divitis - a worthy goal?
I don't think you know what I'm talking about. The information is not for humans... obviously. Accessibility isn't just about people. The extra information is for, as I already stated, computing devices that parse the data. In XML, you really do have that much information every single item is surrounded by unique tags that indicate exactly what it is. If information is not going to be used by humans at the end of the road - ditch it. Let me say it again for the reading impaired: in XML, every single block-level item is surrounded by unique tags that indicate exactly what it is. XML gives you means to do that, but that does not imply that every single block-level item is marked up. And why block level items are so special? I can wrap-up in the tags whatever I want to. Or I can have whole article stuffed into single something.../something And the whole point of X-HTML is to make HTML more like XML. XHTML _is_ XML... talk XML looking like HTML. So that when you send an HTML document to a non-human reader, one that can't understand text, it can still tell what each element is supposed to be, by how you classified and titled and id'ed it. How is it going to understand titles and id's if it does not understand text? It is good to have titles and ids if they will be used for something meaningful - search, tagging, transformations etc. Maybe thinking from the computing end is easier for me because I'm an electrical engineer. Just think of it this way... computer's don't know english. So they know nothing, what given tag means. And computers only process information, the ultimate consumer is a human being Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] divitis - a worthy goal?
2005/9/9, Christian Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED]: We're still not on the same page. May I ask what your experience is with computers? 15 years of programming experience, nine years of professional web development work, including work on internet banking application. And that involves xml and xsl too ;) On the other hand I do not see how is this relevant. My point is very simple: Because you CAN (so something) does not mean you SHOULD. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] divitis - a worthy goal?
2005/9/9, Christian Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Because you CAN (so something) does not mean you SHOULD. Oh, that should be do something. And maybe it is better to go off list if there is something to discuss? I really do not want to hijack this list attention with irrelevant info... Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Browsers as copilers (was) Barclays standards redesign
2005/9/8, Chris Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Exactly. I was actually thinking the other day, browsers should be more like compilers... they should refuse to parse incorrect code. Then the enforcement would be on the output end, too. Perhaps some clever person could write a Firefox extension that does this ... When XHTML is used with proper MIME type no extensions are needed. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Tables - a challenge!
2005/9/8, Ingo Chao [EMAIL PROTECTED]: ... For your specific dead center question, were the pure CSS path shows a very known CSS weakness in vertically centering content: ... A very known Internet Explorer weakness, I would say. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] divitis - a worthy goal?
... Eschewing markup that is not needed today is equivalent to adding presentational decisions to the markup for tomorrow. ... Only if tomorrow we won't have browsers with advanced CSS support (talk multiple backgrounds). Oh, we have these today... Sure, IE is here to stay for a long time, but on the other hand... to the hell with bad browsers? And the last point: today I mostly deal with sites assembled from come blocks. I love to have these blocks as simple as possible. This way tomorrow I can easily make them more complicated by adding some extra divs, but I see no point of doing it today without any need. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] web accessibility toolbar
On 21/08/05, Joshua Street [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do we love to use pixels for font sizing because it has any intrinsic advantage, or simply because we'd rather be designing for print? ... Print? Is print in pixels? Never heard that. My screen is measured in pixels, I view the web on my screen... And there was a time when pixels were the only good choice: http://old.alistapart.com/stories/fear4/ Ok, that was long time ago. Are these the same designers that don't embrace fluid layouts? (I'm not saying that because fluid layouts are intrinsically better, just that it's a good thing to have an open mind towards) ... If anything is better than fixed layout it is elastic layout: that means line length defined in em's. How good layout is for reading does not depend on open-mindness of the designer, it depends on physiology of our sight, and alas tall and narrow is better than wde and shallow. And, if you don't mean a whole-site zoom like Opera uses, but rather just a text-resizing feature (ala Firefox, et al.), then it's really worth asking why on earth you were using pixels in the first place, Why not? In terms of CSS pixels are relative units, just like em and ex. I'd like to quote Joe Clark presentation at @media 2005: Today, I want everyone in the room to take a vow never to say anything like that ever again. Do not tell people, or tell yourself, or even think that there's something inherently wrong with pixel-based fonts. What there's something inherently wrong with is Internet Explorer for Windows ( http://www.joeclark.org/atmedia/atmedia-NOTES-2.html ) ... you know that you're ultimately relinquishing control, and all you're really doing is irritating your users by not respecting their text-size defaults. So this means we shouldn't touch font-size at all. In theory. In practice that just means users are not aware of any text-size defaults. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] web accessibility toolbar
On 21/08/05, Felix Miata [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Everything on a web page is relative to the viewing device, and so px is not relative to anything relevant in the text sizing context. At any given resolution, px is no less absolute or fixed than cm, in, or pt, all of which cannot be resized by IE users. IE _for Windows_ users. And that's not a problem of px. Opera has no problem resizing px, not only text but images too. Shall I quote again? Joe Clark at @media 2005: Today, I want everyone in the room to take a vow never to say anything like that ever again. Do not tell people, or tell yourself, or even think that there's something inherently wrong with pixel-based fonts. What there's something inherently wrong with is Internet Explorer for Windows Whether they are aware or not, they are all humans who cannot read something that isn't big enough to see. By sticking not just to relative units, but to relative units *and* medium/1em/100% as the size dominating your pages, you're making them accessible to absolutely everyone. absolutely everyone. Wow. Regards, Rimantas, -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Firefox DOM and whitespace (bug?)
On 8/4/05, Patrick Ryan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I recently ran across an issue (I would call it a bug?) in firefox's DOM. ... But it seems to me white space should be entirely ignored in the DOM. ... Is this a recent Firefox bug or proper behavior (that must be scripted around...). I'd be interested in any other thoughts/ideas. http://www.mozilla.org/docs/dom/technote/whitespace/ Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] IE7 b1 :/
On 7/29/05, Kazuhito Kidachi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think we should wait for next beta version of IE7. I do understand what many web developers feel about Beta 1, but it's still far from final product, as Dean said at IEBlog. Molly wrapped up about current situation about IE7: http://www.molly.com/2005/07/28/thats-why-its-called-beta/ Do we have a choice? On the other hand, it is naïve to hope anything more from IE7. I agree with ppk (quirksmode.org) — IEs rendering engine is beyond fixing. Somehow I doubt anyone could rewrite and test it before next beta comes out. Just let hope we will not get any new bugs, and we already know how to deal with the old ones... Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/
Re: [WSG] Things I didn't realise, part 126
On 7/26/05, designer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... So this means that support for background fixed works in 5.5, but was dropped in 6, unless it's in quirks. A backward step if ever there was! Can this be right? Or am I too tired . . . Works perfectly for me in IE6 'standards' mode. Can you share code? Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Prototype Framework - script.aculo.us
On 7/22/05, Chris Rizzo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One thing I haven't found yet is a possible alternative to script.aculo.us. We've tried to implement some of these effects and they work in Firefox but not IE (throws no error). There's no help/support anywhere that I can find and documentation is minimum. Does anyone know where there maybe some helpful documentation on the Web? Maybe I have to find the right forum? I had a problem with script from script.aculo.us and the solution was to change doctype so that IE will switch into standards compliant mode. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Complete CSS reset
On 7/5/05, Kenny Graham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... I'm going to be teaching some web developers CSS soon and would like to teach it from a complete seperation of structure from presentation standpoint which is hard to do when headings are still big, blockquotes are still indented, etc. ... I'd say you are pushing a bit too far, it is not bad to have an idea how will page look like using only browser default stylesheet, and it does not make learning separation from presentation any more difficult. But if you still wish to do so here you may find some info: http://www.meyerweb.com/eric/thoughts/2004/09/15/emreallyem-undoing-htmlcss/ Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] input/text random background color in IE?
On 6/27/05, Vaska. WSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why is it that IE turns the background of some input/text elements to light yellow? I can't find any information as to why or how it's doing this...and I want to stop it. Anybody know what this is about? My guess is: you have google toolbar installed. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Standards and ADS
On 6/14/05, Jad Madi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Will ADS break web standards in any mean ? such as Google ads, and Amazon ads? No. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Ten questions for Russ
On 6/7/05, XStandard Vlad Alexander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... [Ian] 4. Author decides to send the same content as application/xhtml+xml, because it is, after all, XHTML. [Vlad] Author wants to learn more about XHTML. What? ... I think arguments like this don't help Web standards. And articles with sensational headlines like XHTML is dead is irresponsible and fear mongering. This is a critical time for Web standards because Web standards are on the verge of becoming mainstream. Software vendors are thinking about making their products/tools standards-compliant, thanks in part to the efforts of WSG members. Don't let your efforts be undermined. Let's keep our eyes on the prize. Yes. Only critical thing for the Web standards is _understanding_ them (and HTML4 _is_ a standard, you know?), not just using something that is cool and much talked about. And understanding includes knowing pros and cons and when and _why_ to use each. What many miss is the fact, that Ian's article and fears is based on the way things work in the real life: oh, let's try something cool, oh it breaks, to the hell with it, who cares. And XHTML makes it much easier to shoot oneself in the foot. So advocate semantics, advocate clean coding, advocate separation of content and presentation, advocate standards - not just a bunch of letters with that sexy X in front. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Ten questions for Russ
On 6/7/05, Ben Curtis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... XHTML is useful to me because I can swap out the DOCTYPE and serve it as HTML, because it *is* HTML, giving it broad support today while giving it a predictable and flexible future. This is, essentially, XHTML-compatible HTML 4.01 Strict. _Only_ because most popular browsers failed to implement SHORTTAG YES. If that would not be the case we could spares some flame-wars... Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] problem with utf-8 page encoding
On 6/5/05, Vaska. WSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not sure what the deal is, but when I bring up a page in my system it doesn't encode properly at first. I have to go the browser options and change it to utf-8. The funny thing is that utf-8 is my default as set in all my browsers. ... I don't have any output buffering or anything of the kind going on here. Is there some on the surface here that I'm missing? My guess would be that you use apache which has AddDefaultCharset in his httpd.conf file uncomented and set to, say ISO-8859-1. You can check what headers you server sends with Firefoxes LiveHTTPHeaders extension or using online tools like this: http://www.seoconsultants.com/tools/headers.asp HTTP headers have higher priority than META. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Site check - lastminute.com
On 5/20/05, Felix Miata [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And from that sample, how many of those users know how to change the default size of the text displayed in their browser? I'm at a loss to think of any reason how an answer to this might be relevant to choosing whether to respect visitors' settings. Don't think how is this relevant -- just answer. Relevancy will show up instantly. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Space-saving Form Select vs Space-hungry HTML List
On 5/16/05, Nick Cowie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dan wrote: What is the 'official' word on the use of form selects as an alternative to space hungry HTML lists? I would not even go think about using a form select for a menu, my experience has shown that most people ignore form selects. ... I can only second that. Use it only if list is reasonably big _and_ contains _known set_ of items (e.g. list of states, or months etc.) Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] whats this
On 5/12/05, Kvnmcwebn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: hello. I was looking over the list navigation article at http://www.complexspiral.com/events/archive/2003/seybold/cssnav.html lia href=index.html id=homeWidgetCo Home/a/li what is the id=home used for in this href? theres no css rule for it in the styles for that page? Check Link hilightning section: body.home a#home... Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Web standards as a selling point?
On 4/22/05, Stevio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One of the first points on that web site is: Sites built with web standards take less time to develop I have to disagree. Trying to lay a site out with CSS can be very complicated and time consuming, given all that hacks that you have to research and use in order to get things to look right and work right across multiple browsers. Depends on skills. For me, handcoder CSS is extremely more efficient way to develop. Table layout, on the other hand, is straightforward and simple. With the help of Dremweaver, I guess. I don't mind table based layouts that much, but I must admit - I came across tableless layouts more often than I see good table based layout. Frankly, I cannot give you any example of such. By Good table based layout I mean one using no more tables than necessary, that is 1 or to in most cases. What I see in reality is dozens, often hundred or more tables - in one page. Now go ahead, code http://www.socmin.lt/ by hand. 191 table and still look crap in Firefox. Not table layout is simple, but the fact that it can be done with WYSIWYG easily makes table layout so attractive. It might be more complicated to maintain when you come back to it a while later and have to work out the nested table colspan'ed layout and make an adjustment to it. However, would a CSS layout be any easier to come back and maintain? (I don't know, I'll find out in a while I suppose.) In table based world presentational markup gets too much into content, so it makes _content_ difficult to maintain (and maintenance cost may exceed those of development many many times, depending of the lifespan of the site). In the case of CSS layout you rarely have to maintain CSS - only in the case of changes in design, not content. Here is something that annoys me too - people dismiss table layout because basically, using tables for layout is not what tables are intended for. Therefore using tables for layout is a 'hack'.However, whenever you try to use CSS for layout, you find out you have to use various 'hacks' to get it all to work right. Therefore, you negate on of the main reasons for using CSS layout in the first place. Wrong. Intent is not the main reason. Main reason for CSS layout is separation of content from presentation. And that gives benefits in development, maintenance and accessibility. ... Here's another thought - is using floats to design things like 3 column layouts a hack in itself? Shouldn't relative positioning be the proper way to do it? Maybe not I just ask :-) ... It does not matter. It may be paradox but the best way to see benefits of CSS layout is to switch off the CSS (given that structural markup is well executed). And that is the point. I rarely use any hacks in CSS, theres is much more talk about them than real nead for them. Walking around the browser bugs is another story. But once again - even if you use hacks they are less hacks because they are removed from your content and document structure. They live isolated, and can be squashed easily when needed. This topic is very flamable, so I won't go on it any more (at least in this thread ;), Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Web standards as a selling point?
On 4/22/05, Stevio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... Using tables for layout is also a fairly intuitive thing, so using them was not a problem for people making web sites. ... Yes, that indeed was the case. Now web is getting mature, so we have to make sites that are easy to USE (and access), not easy to make. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] CSS Zen Garden piss take, anyone got link?
On 4/18/05, Rebecca Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, Don't know if anyone remembers seeing a sort of rip off of CSS Zen Garden a while back? Someone did a manky looking old school design, not on the main site. I'm after the URL if anyone has it. http://www.tastydirt.com/zen/zengarden.htm Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Browser support for javascript CDATA regions
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 13:59:41 +1100, Dmitry Baranovskiy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No worries, just put some extra symbols there: script type=text/javascript !--//![CDATA[ ... //]]-- And that would make browsers which use XML parser to ignore script altogether (assuming XHTML1.1 is served widh application/xhtml+xml MIME type, as it should). One option is go this way: script type=text/javascript!--//--![CDATA[//!-- ... //--!]]/script but I'd prefer to have all scripts in separate .js file. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
